[Effectiveness of a new model of telephone derivation shared between primary care and hospital care]

The purpose of this study is to find out whether telephone referral from Primary Health Care to Internal Medicine Consult manages to reduce waiting days as compared to traditional referral. This study also aims to know how acceptable is the telephone referral to general practitioners and their patients.

No blind randomized controlled clinical trial.

Northern Huelva Health District.

154 patients.

Patients referrals from intervention clinicians were sent via telephone consultation, whereas patients referrals from control clinicians were sent by traditional via.

Number of days from referral request to Internal Medicine Consult. Number of telephone and traditional referrals. Number of doctors and patients denied. Denial reasons.

A statistically significant difference was found between groups, with an average of 27 (21-34) days. Among General Practitioners, 8 of the first 58 total doctors after randomization and, subsequently, 6 of the 20 doctors of the test group refused to engage in the trial because they considered "excessive time and effort consuming". 50% of patients referred by the 14 General Practitioners finally randomized to the intervention group were denied referral by telephone due to patient's complexity.

Telephone referral significantly reduces waiting days for Internal Medicine consult. This type of referral did not mean an "excessive time and effort consuming" to General Practitioners and was not all that beneficial to complex patients.