Skip to main content
. 2015 Feb 23;2015(2):CD005610. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005610.pub2

4. Interventions aimed at restructuring referral processes: reanalysed ITS studies.

Study Outcome Postintervention period Secular trend (SE, P) Change in level (SE, P) Change in slope (SE, P)
Direct/open access and direct booking systems
Lukman 2004 Proportion of participants waiting less than recommended time threshold (percentage of participants with moderate/severe lesions waiting less than 4 weeks) every 3 months 24 months +0.86% (SE 3.78 P value 0.83) ‐14.26% (SE 19.83, P value 0.50) +6.29% (SE 12.26, P value 0.62)
Mallard 2004 Waiting time (days) per month 12 months +1.40 (SE 0.8, P value 0.13) ‐25.20 (SE 3.83, P value < 0.001) ‐3.03 (SE 0.92, P value 0.005)
Distant consultancy
Hofstetter 2010 Waiting time (months) per year 6 years ‐0.04
(SE 0.06, P value 0.51)
‐0.69 (SE 0.55, P value 0.23) ‐0.21 (SE 0.13, P value 0.15)
Single generic waiting list
Leach 2004 Number of participants waiting less than recommended time threshold
(less than 9 months) per month
14 months +9.44 (SE 10.93, P value 0.40) ‐20.59 (SE 22.67, P value 0.37) +2.75 (SE 12.69, P value 0.86)
Number of participants waiting within a recommended time threshold
(between 9 and 18 months) per month
‐3.30 (SE 7.78, P value 0.68) ‐5.28 (SE 16.20, P value 0.75) ‐6.59 (SE 8.73, P value 0.46)