Are you T Potter?

Claim your profile

Publications (3)9.74 Total impact

  • Rheumatology 09/2006; 45(8):1044. · 4.21 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine the preferences of rheumatology patients for the time and location of their out-patient appointments. All patients attending the rheumatology out-patient services at Dudley Group of Hospitals NHS Trust over a 2-week period were asked to complete a purpose-designed, scannable, previously piloted, self-administered questionnaire. Four hundred and nineteen patients completed questionnaires (response rate 87%). Age ranged from 16 to 92 yr; 38% of responders were over 65 yr, 72% were female, 57% had an inflammatory arthritis, 20% had a connective tissue disease, 8% had degenerative joint disease and 15% had another diagnosis; 29% were employed, 51% retired and 20% unemployed. Fewer than 1% of patients would like to be seen at community general practice centres (99.3% would prefer a hospital site). Proximity to their home was the main determinant of hospital choice. Monday was the most popular day for appointments, and days from Tuesday to Friday received equal rankings. Only 0.5% of patients would choose a weekend clinic. Fifty-eight per cent of patients would prefer morning appointments, 24% afternoon appointments and 2% evening appointments; 16% did not mind. Only being employed predicted out-of-hours preference. In this predominantly suburban, industrialized area, rheumatology out-patients prefer to be seen in the hospital rather than primary care environment, ideally close to their home, with appointments in the morning and on a weekday. These results may be generalizable to other districts and other chronic disease states, but we suggest that similar surveys become part of routine service provision and inform current and future planning.
    Rheumatology 02/2005; 44(1):80-2. · 4.21 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The management of corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis in rheumatology outpatients in the West Midlands was audited in relation to the 2002 Royal College of Physicians (RCP) Guidelines and re-audited in relation to the 1998 National Osteoporosis Society (NOS) Guidance. Practice was assessed from prospective data on all follow-up patients over a 2-week period in 13 rheumatology units. Data were analysed on 2,609 patients. Of the 626 patients fulfilling criteria for assessment against the RCP Guidelines, 351 (56.1%) were treated appropriately. The results do not allow for availability of, or wait for, DEXA scanning. Of 197 patients fulfilling the criteria for assessment against the NOS Guidance, 137 (69.5%) were treated appropriately, compared to 63% in a similar audit undertaken in 2000. Regional audit may facilitate clinical governance. These audits will inform discussion on both improving local practice and strengthening cases for improved osteoporosis services.
    Clinical medicine (London, England) 6(2):183-7. · 1.32 Impact Factor