Authors :
Dr. Saad Ali; Dr. Sarah Anwar; Dr. Irsa Hidayat; Dr. Faiza Khatoon; Dr. Ahsan Ali; Dr. Mashal Tamsil; Dr. Muhammad Latif
Volume/Issue :
Volume 8 - 2023, Issue 10 - October
Google Scholar :
https://tinyurl.com/yrnpb7jz
Scribd :
https://tinyurl.com/3w4nedzk
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10066441
Abstract :
Objective: By comparing the presence of
medical departments and the accessibility of diagnostic
tools, the main goal of this study is to evaluate and contrast
the healthcare services provided by MMC and DHQ. It
also seeks to examine patient referral trends with regard to
gender and destination (MMC or PESH). The study looks
for differences in referral patterns and healthcare access
across the two medical centers.
Methods: Before starting the investigation, ethical
permission was obtained. The period of data collecting was
September 2021 to September 2022. Referred patients to
the Pulmonology OPD were routinely assessed. Data were
gathered using diagnostic tests in accordance with the
World Health Organization's guidelines for lung illnesses.
In the analysis, secondary and tertiary care departments
each participated. To glean useful insights and spot trends
and connections, data analysis was carried out using SPSS
version 24.
Results: The study found that while both MMC and DHQ
had a pulmonology department, DHQ does not have an
ENT or gastroenterology department. In general, MMC
provides a wider selection of diagnostic tools than DHQ.
While DHQ lacks a number of cutting-edge diagnostic
instruments, MMC contains technology that can be used
for bronchoscopy, CT scan, MRI, echo, endo bronchal
ultrasound, and more. A sizable number of
recommendations were made to MMC, especially in the
departments of gastroenterology, emergency medicine, and
pulmonary medicine. There are different referral
percentages, but a sizable fraction goes to MMC. The fact
that more patients were referred to MMC (239) than to
DHQ (189), demonstrates the significance of MMC as a
location for medical referrals.
Conclusion: The differences in healthcare services between
MMC and DHQ are highlighted by this study. DHQ falls
short in several areas while MMC has a greater selection
of medical departments and diagnostic tools. Additionally,
patient referral trends show a preference for MMC,
highlighting the requirement for fair access to healthcare.
These findings highlight possible areas for expanding
healthcare access and infrastructure, which will eventually
improve patient care and optimise the healthcare system.
Keywords :
Tertiary Care, Secondary Care, Pulmonology, MRI, CT-Scan, Referrals
Objective: By comparing the presence of
medical departments and the accessibility of diagnostic
tools, the main goal of this study is to evaluate and contrast
the healthcare services provided by MMC and DHQ. It
also seeks to examine patient referral trends with regard to
gender and destination (MMC or PESH). The study looks
for differences in referral patterns and healthcare access
across the two medical centers.
Methods: Before starting the investigation, ethical
permission was obtained. The period of data collecting was
September 2021 to September 2022. Referred patients to
the Pulmonology OPD were routinely assessed. Data were
gathered using diagnostic tests in accordance with the
World Health Organization's guidelines for lung illnesses.
In the analysis, secondary and tertiary care departments
each participated. To glean useful insights and spot trends
and connections, data analysis was carried out using SPSS
version 24.
Results: The study found that while both MMC and DHQ
had a pulmonology department, DHQ does not have an
ENT or gastroenterology department. In general, MMC
provides a wider selection of diagnostic tools than DHQ.
While DHQ lacks a number of cutting-edge diagnostic
instruments, MMC contains technology that can be used
for bronchoscopy, CT scan, MRI, echo, endo bronchal
ultrasound, and more. A sizable number of
recommendations were made to MMC, especially in the
departments of gastroenterology, emergency medicine, and
pulmonary medicine. There are different referral
percentages, but a sizable fraction goes to MMC. The fact
that more patients were referred to MMC (239) than to
DHQ (189), demonstrates the significance of MMC as a
location for medical referrals.
Conclusion: The differences in healthcare services between
MMC and DHQ are highlighted by this study. DHQ falls
short in several areas while MMC has a greater selection
of medical departments and diagnostic tools. Additionally,
patient referral trends show a preference for MMC,
highlighting the requirement for fair access to healthcare.
These findings highlight possible areas for expanding
healthcare access and infrastructure, which will eventually
improve patient care and optimise the healthcare system.
Keywords :
Tertiary Care, Secondary Care, Pulmonology, MRI, CT-Scan, Referrals
