Table 2

Association between referral to additional PCH assessment or to external services and the PCH approach (triage vs usual care)

Triage approach
n=974
Usual approach
n=923
OR*95% CIp Value
Referral after pre-assessment by PCH assistantReferral after receiving a follow-up assessment from a PCH physician or nurseReferral after assessment by PCH physician or nurse
n (%)n (%)n (%)
All referrals
Children referred to follow-up assessment444 (45.6)
Children referred to additional PCH assessment and/or external services176 (18.1)†177 (19.2)0.90.7 to 1.10.42
 Additional PCH assessment152 (15.6)116 (12.6)1.31.0 to 1.60.09
 External services35 (3.6)73 (7.9)0.40.3 to 0.7<0.01
Indication for referral: weight problem
Children referred to follow-up assessment150 (15.4)
Children referred to additional PCH assessment and/or external services44 (4.5)48 (5.2)0.80.5 to 1.30.36
 Additional PCH assessment43 (4.4)38 (4.1)1.00.7 to 1.60.89
 External services3 (0.3)13 (1.4)0.20.1 to 0.70.01
Indication for referral: visual disorder
Children referred to follow-up assessment47 (4.8)
Children referred to additional PCH assessment and/or external services16 (1.6)22 (2.4)0.70.3 to 1.30.25
 Additional PCH assessment10 (1.0)10 (1.1)1.00.4 to 2.40.94
 External services8 (0.8)14 (1.5)0.50.2 to 1.30.15
Indication for referral: psychosocial problem
Children referred to follow-up assessment152 (15.6)
Children referred to additional PCH assessment and/or external services48 (4.9)57 (6.2)0.80.5 to 1.10.17
 Additional PCH assessment38 (3.9)36 (3.9)0.90.6 to 1.50.82
 External services12 (1.2)23 (2.5)0.50.2 to 1.00.05
  • *Logistic regression analyses with referral by PCH as the outcome variable, the approach (triage follow-up assessment or usual assessment) as the independent variable and socioeconomic status as covariate.

  • †Some children were referred to both additional PCH assessment and external services.

  • PCH, Preventive Child Healthcare.