Plantinga Laura C, Fink Nancy E, Sadler John H, Levey Andrew S, Levin Nathan W, Rubin Haya R, Coresh Josef, Klag Michael J, Powe Neil R
Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2004 Jan;15(1):210-8. doi: 10.1097/01.asn.0000106101.48237.9d.
There is little evidence supporting the widespread belief that regular patient-physician contact in chronic disease management leads to better patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to examine the relationship of the frequency of patient-physician contact with several patient outcomes in a prospective cohort study begun in 1995 of incident hemodialysis patients treated at 75 US dialysis clinics. Average frequency of patient-physician contact at each clinic was determined by clinic survey (low, monthly or less frequent; intermediate, between monthly and weekly; high, more than weekly). The authors used logistic, Poisson, and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses to assess the relationship between contact and satisfaction, quality of life, patient adherence, hospitalizations, and mortality. Of 735 hemodialysis patients, 14.3% were treated at clinics with high frequency of contact, 65.2% intermediate, and 20.5% low. Patients treated at clinics reporting less frequent physician contact had lower odds of rating the frequency at which they saw a nephrologist excellent (low: adjusted OR = 0.39, 95% CI, 0.23-0.67; intermediate: adjusted OR = 0.57, 95% CI, 0.37-0.87; reference, high) and greater odds of nonadherence (low: adjusted OR = 2.89, 95% CI, 1.01-8.29; intermediate: adjusted OR = 1.58, 95% CI, 0.78-3.19). However, patient survival did not vary by frequency of physician contact (low: adjusted RH = 0.87, 95% CI, 0.53-1.44; intermediate: adjusted RH = 1.33, 95% CI, 0.82-2.13), nor did patients' overall ratings of care, hospitalization rates, or quality of life measures. Although less frequent patient-physician contact was associated with lower patient satisfaction with that contact and patient nonadherence, it was not associated with several other outcomes of care. Future studies are needed to assess the individual frequency and nature of physician contact over time, including total time spent with the patient and quality of the interaction, to guide the provision of patient-centered and cost-effective care.
几乎没有证据支持这种广泛存在的观点,即慢性病管理中患者与医生的定期接触会带来更好的患者治疗效果。本研究的目的是在一项始于1995年的前瞻性队列研究中,考察美国75家透析诊所新接受血液透析治疗患者的医患接触频率与多个患者治疗效果之间的关系。通过诊所调查确定每家诊所医患接触的平均频率(低,每月或更低频率;中等,每月至每周之间;高,每周以上)。作者使用逻辑回归、泊松回归和Cox比例风险回归分析来评估接触与满意度、生活质量、患者依从性、住院率和死亡率之间的关系。在735名血液透析患者中,14.3%在接触频率高的诊所接受治疗,65.2%为中等频率,20.5%为低频率。在报告医患接触频率较低的诊所接受治疗的患者,将他们看肾病专家的频率评为优秀的几率较低(低:调整后的比值比=0.39,95%置信区间,0.23 - 0.67;中等:调整后的比值比=0.57,95%置信区间,0.37 - 0.87;参照组,高),不依从的几率更高(低:调整后的比值比=2.89,95%置信区间,1.01 - 8.29;中等:调整后的比值比=1.58,95%置信区间,0.78 - 3.19)。然而,患者生存率并未因医患接触频率而有所不同(低:调整后的风险比=0.87,95%置信区间,0.53 - 1.44;中等:调整后的风险比=1.33,95%置信区间,0.82 - 2.13),患者对医疗的总体评分、住院率或生活质量指标也没有差异。虽然较低的医患接触频率与患者对这种接触的较低满意度以及患者不依从相关,但它与其他几个医疗结果并无关联。未来需要开展研究,以评估随着时间推移医生接触的个体频率和性质,包括与患者相处的总时间以及互动质量,从而指导提供以患者为中心且具有成本效益的医疗服务。