Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Retrospective chart review characterizes self-referred versus provider-referred patients, highlighting care access.
INTRODUCTION: The option for self-referral to urogynecology provides an important avenue to access care. Increasingly, patients are pursuing self-referral; however, little is known about the self-referred population compared with those referred. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to characterize the self-referred and provider referred patient populations presenting to urogynecology, to identify factors associated with self-referral. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of individuals aged ≥18 years that presented as new patients to the Division of Urogynecology. Charts were screened to reach 2200 subjects, inclusive of all new patient visits from 3/2023 to 12/2024. We abstracted data on referral status, age, race/ethnicity, insurance, language, if pregnant or postpartum, and primary diagnosis. The 9-digit zip code was used to determine the area deprivation index (ADI) state and national rankings. Cohorts were defined by referral status, comparing self-referred versus provider-referred subjects. Our primary objective was to assess demographic and clinical factors associated with self-referral. RESULTS: A total of 2200 subjects were included, with 753 (34.2%) self-referred and 1447 (65.8%) provider referred. The majority were non-Hispanic white (57.7%), English-speaking (93.5%), privately insured (59.2%), and represented the least disadvantaged neighborhoods based on ADI for state (63.1%) and national (85.9%) rankings. The most common primary diagnoses included: urinary incontinence [UI] (49.9%), pelvic organ prolapse [POP] (17.7%), urinary tract infections [UTIs] (13.5%), and pain conditions (9.2%). Self-referred subjects were more likely to be non-Hispanic white (61.6% vs 55.6%, p=0.006), English speaking (95.6% vs 92.3%, p=0.011), and have a diagnosis of POP (20.1% vs 16.5%, p<0.001), UTIs (17.3% vs 11.5%, p<0.001), or pain conditions (11.7% vs 8.0%, p<0.001). Those less likely to be self-referred had a primary diagnosis of UI (41.6% vs 54.3%, p<0.001), were pregnant (0.3% vs 1.6%, p=0.005), or were postpartum (2.8% vs 8.6%, p<0.001). There were no differences in ADI rankings between groups. Noting the differences in primary diagnosis between the self-referred and provider-referred populations, we also evaluated the likelihood of self-referral by diagnosis. Of the total subjects presenting with UI, only 28.5% were self-referred, compared with POP (38.8%), UTIs (43.9%), and pain conditions (43.3%). Controlling for race/ethnicity, insurance type, language, pregnant or postpartum, and primary diagnosis, the following remained associated with self-referral status: non-English primary language (aOR 0.57, 95% CI 0.370, 0.893, p=0.014), pregnant or postpartum (aOR 0.23, 95% CI 0.146, 0.372, p<0.001), and primary diagnosis of POP (aOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.361, 2.244, p<0.001), UTIs (aOR 1.89, 95% CI 1.444, 2.473, p<0.001), or pain conditions (aOR 2.02, 95% CI 1.469, 2.778, p<0.001), with UI as the reference. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of new patients presenting to urogynecology represent self-referrals. Aside from primary language, demographic factors were not associated with referral status. While urinary incontinence represented the most common reason for urogynecologic evaluation among provider-referred and self-referred individuals, patients were comparatively less likely to identify this as a reason for self-referral. Our results suggest a possible benefit to targeted patient outreach related to urinary incontinence. Given existing barriers to care, opportunities to increase self-referrals to urogynecology may enhance access.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Husk et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: