Why so long?

[whiskywill]

After experiencing a bit of discomfort, my doctor suspects that I have a cartilage tear in my knee joint and sent me to have an X ray at the local hospital. Why, with modern communication technology, does it take "about a week to get the result back to your GP"? Does the NHS still use Royal Mail to send bits of paper?

 

[t8hants]

Because the results have to confirmed by two people, one of whom should be a consultant, the results then have to be typed up. Also you probably were not the only soul x-rayed that day, so there will be more than your notes for the staff to deal with, but when that is achieved it should be communicated paperlessly, but that is only depending on how up to speed your area health authority is.

G

 

[whiskywill]

Thanks for your informed explanation. I didn't know the hospital interpreted the X-ray result. I assumed my GP would do that.

 

[WandrinAndy]

After experiencing a bit of discomfort, my doctor suspects that I have a cartilage tear in my knee joint and sent me to have an X ray at the local hospital. Why, with modern communication technology, does it take "about a week to get the result back to your GP"? Does the NHS still use Royal Mail to send bits of paper?

Regardless of who needs to confirm the results and type up the results and the number of people being x-rayed, the pace of communicating results in a case like this is simply pathetic. The state pays plenty of dosh into the system and the system should react far quicker than that.... In fact it should react up to modern expectations.

 

[whiskywill]

When I saw the practice nurse this morning to get the results of an unrelated blood test I mentioned the X ray and the promise of the results in "about a week". Her response was "They lied to you. They usually take two weeks."

 

[AndyT]

Let's think about the processes behind the apparent slowness. The same logic applies to many areas of work - including woodworking!

The actual time needed to look at an x-ray and decide what it means can be very short - let's say one minute. Typing up a report is pretty quick too - in fact most radiology departments use voice recognition to speed this up further. Maybe another minute. Double that for the quality control checking. Add on transmission to the GP - which is generally electronic unless you've gone somewhere unusual for the exam. So maybe five minutes total actual work. You might expect the result to be with your GP within two hours. Reasonable? No.

The work of interpreting x-rays does not come in an even, predictable stream. It varies with the time of day, day of the week, time of year, weather conditions, and other unpredictable factors. Sometimes there will be a lot at once, then nothing for a while, then another peak. If every job had to be turned round in under two hours, the staffing would have to be at a level to meet the periods of highest demand. The staff would then have to wait around at non-peak times ready for some more work to come in.

Staffing to that level would be impractical and hugely expensive.

It makes far more sense to have enough people to cope with all the work - so no backlog builds up - averaged out over a fortnight or so.

(Also, for some lab tests, it really does take several days for a chemical reaction to complete, or a culture to grow to observable size. The diagnostic devices used on Star Trek are fictional!)

 

[bugbear]

Let's think about the processes behind the apparent slowness. The same logic applies to many areas of work - including woodworking!

The actual time needed to look at an x-ray and decide what it means can be very short - let's say one minute. Typing up a report is pretty quick too - in fact most radiology departments use voice recognition to speed this up further. Maybe another minute. Double that for the quality control checking. Add on transmission to the GP - which is generally electronic unless you've gone somewhere unusual for the exam. So maybe five minutes total actual work. You might expect the result to be with your GP within two hours. Reasonable? No.

The work of interpreting x-rays does not come in an even, predictable stream. It varies with the time of day, day of the week, time of year, weather conditions, and other unpredictable factors. Sometimes there will be a lot at once, then nothing for a while, then another peak. If every job had to be turned round in under two hours, the staffing would have to be at a level to meet the periods of highest demand. The staff would then have to wait around at non-peak times ready for some more work to come in.

Staffing to that level would be impractical and hugely expensive.

It makes far more sense to have enough people to cope with all the work - so no backlog builds up - averaged out over a fortnight or so.

(Also, for some lab tests, it really does take several days for a chemical reaction to complete, or a culture to grow to observable size. The diagnostic devices used on Star Trek are fictional!)

Further, following your analysis, you can "batch up" the work, to gain efficiency (in terms of the ratio of man hours to work done).

BugBear

 

[Kalimna]

As a further note, accepting all of the above, there is also the matter of urgency. Whilst it may not feel so to you, a painful knee with suspected cartilage tear does not warrant the highest degree of urgency on the part of the folk doing the investigation. Not in the same league as a suspected pneumonia, for instance. So whilst it is possible to have an immediate answer (and even that takes a fair bit longer than five minutes, even with the consultant radiologist sitting next to you and your patient in the scanner - I know from several experiences), I'm afraid some things don't warrant it.
An X-ray of the knee for suspected sft tissue injury doesn't sound like the best investigation anyway, but that is a different matter.
As stated above, these X-ray images need to be looked at, interpreted, checked, written up etc, and all this tak time. To use an analogy, how long does it take you to check the grain direction of a piece of wood prior to planing it? Well, then imagine doing that only from a photo that is monochrome and slightly fuzzy, oh and you have to get it right first time too. Well, that's just the interpretive bit, before the write up, etc.

Btw, I hope your knee improves.

Adam.

 

[Alex H]

Let's think about the processes behind the apparent slowness. The same logic applies to many areas of work - including woodworking!

The actual time needed to look at an x-ray and decide what it means can be very short - let's say one minute. Typing up a report is pretty quick too - in fact most radiology departments use voice recognition to speed this up further. Maybe another minute. Double that for the quality control checking. Add on transmission to the GP - which is generally electronic unless you've gone somewhere unusual for the exam. So maybe five minutes total actual work. You might expect the result to be with your GP within two hours. Reasonable? No.

The work of interpreting x-rays does not come in an even, predictable stream. It varies with the time of day, day of the week, time of year, weather conditions, and other unpredictable factors. Sometimes there will be a lot at once, then nothing for a while, then another peak. If every job had to be turned round in under two hours, the staffing would have to be at a level to meet the periods of highest demand. The staff would then have to wait around at non-peak times ready for some more work to come in.

Staffing to that level would be impractical and hugely expensive.

It makes far more sense to have enough people to cope with all the work - so no backlog builds up - averaged out over a fortnight or so.

(Also, for some lab tests, it really does take several days for a chemical reaction to complete, or a culture to grow to observable size. The diagnostic devices used on Star Trek are fictional!)

Great explanation BUT,

Better open one of these first :roll:



Here in France, similar population, larger area, X-ray results are interpreted by a consultant when they are taken. the patient gets a copy of the film to keep and one is sent to their doctor.

Blood tests are taken locally in a special clinic and results are send both to the patient and doctor and are generally received the next day in the post. if a special test is required, it's usually sent to Paris and the results come within a week.

MRI scans are similar - you may have to travel a bit to a regional centre, but the results are available as soon as the scan is taken. MRI's are usually seen by another consultant as well as the original, but the timing is similar.

Although the funding for the health service here is largely by insurance, they do seem to put the money in the right places, unlike the NHS, the 5th largest employer in the world (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17429786)

 

[nev]

.... The diagnostic devices used on Star Trek are fictional!)

Maybe! but the ones in Stargate SG1 aren't - I've got one 8)

although I must admit its not very good at diagnosing things, wrong software I guess but it is good for removing soaps and reality shows from the lounge :wink:

 

[finneyb]

Had an NHS endoscope the other week - walked out of the session with a diagnosis, GP was copied in later and I didn't even need to see him. That's how it should be.

If they can't turn X-rays around in 24 hours its time to look at the private sector doing it.
Suggest it to your CCG (Clinical Commissioning Group)

Brian

 

[Jonzjob]

Good 'ere init Alex :mrgreen: :mrgreen: Mind you we usually have to wait about 20 minutes after the xRay/IRM/Etc. for the secretaries to trype up the result.

I had to wait nearly a week before I could get to see a specialist once :shock: :shock:

Hospital food is c r a p though :?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I've loads of problems, and I'm fed up with people tryping things up.