"University Hospital Plymouth (Derriford) and Sentinel- screening process"

My mother was referred for a hip replacement to Derriford. She had been referred for this 2 years ago and had seen the Consultant Orthopaedic surgeon who had recommended that she could have the operation - but in the end she 'chickened out' - as she had had a bad experience with her previous hip -getting some virus while in another hospital and being very unwell with vomiting and diarrhoea. So although her second hip was bad, she was put off getting in done, and decided to 'leave it'. However, over these subsequent two years the pain has got considerably worse and she is now in constant pain and taking considerable doses of morphine to control it. So, she went back to her GP to be considered again for a hip replacement. Her GP had referred her back to Orthopaedics, and here begins the point of this post.

After a few months wait she had eventually got an appointment at Mount Gould hospital, apparently to see 'orthopaedics'. Given that she had - two years before seen the consultant who had recommended an operation, it would seem reasonable to assume that 'orthopaedics' could tell from that and the GP's referral letter that she was a suitable case for operation. But this appointment was with a Sentinel doctor - very pleasant etc - but simply going through a series of 10 or so questions which will then get my mother on to the next stage, ie a 'proper' appointment at Derriford. So why was this necessary? What is the purpose?

We realise that Derriford has this system in place to try to ensure good use of resources - or perhaps, more cynically we wonder if it is just to add a further delay while still meeting various targets of 'having been seen'. But surely, if the referral letter had sufficient information and the Derriford case notes clearly show the clinical need for an operation, is this intermediate appointment with Sentinel not just a waste of money for the local health economy and a waste of time and lengthened time in pain for the patient. Those 10 or so questions could have been answered by the referring GP - I am pretty sure that the doctor we saw in Sentinel/Mount Gould was himself a locum GP, so not with any special training or expertise compared to the referring GP.

Can this system of Sentinel screening really be justified? Certainly for my mother it was (assuming they had proper records and referral information) a waste of time.