Chris Lancelot: Spellbound by the magic of referral statistics

There is a belief among certain tribes that to know a person's name is to have power over them. 'How superstitious,' we say, feeling very smug. Yet we can make the same mistake over statistics.

Large numbers of NHS doctors and managers still hold the primitive, unscientific belief that having data on something means that they have power over it, but this could not be further from the truth.

Consider the present obsession with referral statistics. We have known for two decades that there is no relationship between the quality of a doctor and his or her referral rates. Good doctors may refer more because they diagnose more; or refer less because they can deal with more situations themselves. On the other hand, bad doctors may also have a high referral rate because they do not know what to do next; or they may refer little because they spot little.

Crude referral rates by themselves tell us nothing. Despite this, PCTs and practice-based commissioning groups frequently believe such statistics are important, and that they can use them meaningfully and powerfully. Quite fairly they want to improve the quality and cost-effectiveness of GP referrals, but invariably they attempt to do this by investigating those practices whose referral rates are significantly above or below the average.

But if there is no relationship between the quality of a doctor and their referral rates, then why bother? Surely they should be investigating the average practices as well? Maybe their average referral rate comes about because half their doctors haven't a clue and hardly refer anything, while the other half know precisely what they are doing and refer a lot because they spot a lot.

If we want to make the NHS more efficient then we must rid ourselves of our primitive belief in crude referral data. We should stop wasting time both collecting it and holding interminable meetings to discuss it. Instead we should develop tools that really will refine our referral patterns. The only effective method I know is where the consultant rates each referral for appropriateness: and yet this is the one statistic that everyone fights shy of collecting.

Ah, the magic of statistics. How beguiling it can be.

Dr Lancelot is a GP from Lancashire. Email him at GPcolumnists@haymarket.com.

Have you registered with us yet?

Register now to enjoy more articles and free email bulletins

Register

Already registered?

Sign in

Follow Us:

Just published

COVID-19 death rate highest among BAME groups, delayed PHE review confirms

COVID-19 death rate highest among BAME groups, delayed PHE review confirms

Death rates from COVID-19 are highest among patients from BAME groups, according...

GPs face hundreds of complaints over shielding and PPE during pandemic

GPs face hundreds of complaints over shielding and PPE during pandemic

GP practices have faced hundreds of complaints over issues including shielding and...

More than 3,600 GP partners lost in four years as decline accelerates

More than 3,600 GP partners lost in four years as decline accelerates

The number of full-time equivalent (FTE) GP partners in England fell by 3,636 between...

COVID-19 pandemic leaves 2.4m patients stuck in cancer care backlog

COVID-19 pandemic leaves 2.4m patients stuck in cancer care backlog

Around 2.4m patients are waiting longer for cancer tests or treatment because of...

PHE report delayed on how ethnicity affects COVID-19 outcomes

PHE report delayed on how ethnicity affects COVID-19 outcomes

Public Health England (PHE) has missed its 31 May deadline for reporting on how factors...

Lockdown complacency threatens second COVID-19 spike that could 'overwhelm' NHS

Lockdown complacency threatens second COVID-19 spike that could 'overwhelm' NHS

Complacency around easing coronavirus lockdown measures could trigger a second wave...