[Does the communication between primary and secondary levels function?].
OBJECTIVE
To analyse the quality of information transmitted by the interclinical form (DI-1) between primary and secondary care levels; and the frequency and causes of the primary care doctor's not receiving a reply.


METHODS
Descriptive and blind for the doctors taking part.


METHODS
Seven health centres and 12 specialist out-clinics in the Bizkaia Health region.


METHODS
The DIs issued by 43 general practitioners and answers from the specialists.


METHODS
We recorded all the referrals during a 7-day period (18-26 April 1994). After the normal waiting time we went to the centres to collect the returned DIs. Patients whose form was not found in the records were phoned. Five people (3 family doctors: one as Director and two specialists) evaluated the DI, in line with established criteria.


RESULTS
Information was lost in 78% of the total number of referrals. The main cause was the specialist not replying (50.7%); the second, the route the form took and the patient (20.9%). The quality of information of the DI analysed was good/acceptable in 92.5% of those issued and in 90% of replies.


CONCLUSIONS
The high percentage loss of information was mainly due to the specialist and, secondly, to the route taken and patient. We recommended the introduction of internal mail between both levels and a study of the attitudes and expectations of the professionals concerned in order to improve the interrelationship and quality of health provision.
Irazábal Olabarrieta
L
L
Centro de Salud de Rekaldeberri Bilbao Llodio Alava.
Gutiérrez Ruiz
B
B
D008499:Medical Records; D008511:Medicine; D011320:Primary Health Care; D011787:Quality of Health Care; D012017:Referral and Consultation; D013030:Spain; D013038:Specialization
Funciona la comunicación entre los niveles primario y secundario?