Suppr超能文献

衡量初级保健预约服务的可及性:方法综述

Measuring access to primary care appointments: a review of methods.

作者信息

Jones Wendy, Elwyn Glyn, Edwards Peter, Edwards Adrian, Emmerson Melody, Hibbs Richard

机构信息

Department of Primary Care, The Clinical School, University of Wales Swansea, UK.

出版信息

BMC Fam Pract. 2003 Jul 7;4:8. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-4-8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patient access to primary care appointments is not routinely measured despite the increasing interest in this aspect of practice activity. The generation of standardised data (or benchmarks) for access could inform developments within primary care organisations and act as a quality marker for clinical governance. Logically the setting of targets should be based on a sound system of measurement. The practicalities of developing appropriate measures need debate. Therefore we aimed to search for and compare methods that have been published or are being developed to measure patient access to primary care appointments, with particular focus on finding methods using appointment system data.

METHOD

A search and review was made of the primary care literature from 1990 to 2001, which included an assessment of online resources (websites) and communication with recognised experts. The identified methods were assessed.

RESULTS

The published literature in this specific area was not extensive but revealed emerging interest in the late 1990s. Two broad approaches to the measurement of waiting times to GP appointments were identified. Firstly, appointment systems in primary care organisations were analysed in differing ways to provide numerical data and, secondly, patient perceptions (reports) of access were evaluated using survey techniques. Six different methods were found which were based on appointment systems data.

CONCLUSION

The two approaches of either using patient questionnaires or appointment system data are methods that represent entirely different aims. The latter method when used to represent patient waiting times for 'routine' elective appointments seems to hold promise as a useful tool and this avoids the definitional problems that surround 'urgent' appointments. The purpose for which the data is being collected needs to be borne in mind and will determine the chosen methods of data retrieval and representation.

摘要

背景

尽管人们对基层医疗预约服务的关注度日益提高,但患者获得基层医疗预约服务的情况却没有得到常规测量。生成关于预约服务的标准化数据(或基准)可以为基层医疗机构的发展提供参考,并作为临床治理的质量指标。从逻辑上讲,目标的设定应该基于完善的测量系统。开发合适测量方法的实际操作需要进行讨论。因此,我们旨在寻找并比较已发表或正在开发的用于测量患者获得基层医疗预约服务情况的方法,特别关注利用预约系统数据的方法。

方法

对1990年至2001年的基层医疗文献进行检索和综述,其中包括对在线资源(网站)的评估以及与知名专家的沟通。对识别出的方法进行评估。

结果

该特定领域已发表的文献并不广泛,但显示出在20世纪90年代后期出现了新的兴趣点。确定了两种测量全科医生预约等待时间的主要方法。首先,以不同方式分析基层医疗机构的预约系统以提供数值数据,其次,使用调查技术评估患者对预约服务的看法(报告)。发现了六种基于预约系统数据的不同方法。

结论

使用患者问卷或预约系统数据这两种方法代表了完全不同的目的。后一种方法在用于表示“常规”择期预约的患者等待时间时,似乎有望成为一种有用的工具,并且避免了围绕“紧急”预约的定义问题。需要牢记收集数据的目的,这将决定所选择的数据检索和呈现方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/88d8/169167/e26bb93faeba/1471-2296-4-8-1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验