Williams Carl A, Templin Thomas, Mosley-Williams Angelia D
ArtfulMed.com, 15920 Glastonbury, Detroit, MI 48223, USA.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2004 Jul-Aug;11(4):249-59. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M1527. Epub 2004 Apr 2.
This study quantified the ease of use for patients and providers of a microcomputer-based, computer-assisted interview (CAI) system for the serial collection of the American College of Rheumatology Patient Assessment (ACRPA) questionnaire in routine outpatient clinical care in an urban rheumatology clinic.
A cross-sectional survey was used.
The answers of 93 respondents to a computer use questionnaire mailed to the 130 participants of a previous validation study of the CAI system were analyzed. For a 30-month period, the percentage of patient visits during which complete ACRPA questionnaire data were obtained with the system was determined.
The computer system provided cost and labor savings in the collection of 2,476 questionnaires for 2,964 patients visits over 30 months for a capture rate of 83.5%. In the last 12 of those months, 1,035 questionnaires were collected for 1,062 patient visits (97.5% capture). There were no missing data. The prestudy capture rate was 13.5%, with 33% of surveys having complete data. Patients rated the overall usability of the system as good (mean = 1.34, standard deviation = 0.61) on a scale of 0-2, where 2 = good, but expressed difficulty with mouse manipulation and concerns about the privacy of the data entry environment. CONCLUSION The system proved easy to use and cost-effective for the (mostly) unaided self-entry of self-report data for each patient for each visit in routine outpatient clinical care in an urban rheumatology clinic.
本研究对一种基于微型计算机的计算机辅助访谈（CAI）系统的易用性进行了量化，该系统用于在城市风湿病门诊的常规门诊临床护理中连续收集美国风湿病学会患者评估（ACRPA）问卷。
采用横断面调查。
分析了93名受访者对邮寄给CAI系统先前验证研究的130名参与者的计算机使用问卷的回答。在30个月的时间里，确定了使用该系统获得完整ACRPA问卷数据的患者就诊百分比。
在30个月内，该计算机系统为2964次患者就诊收集了2476份问卷，节省了成本和劳动力，捕获率为83.5%。在这30个月的最后12个月里，为1062次患者就诊收集了1035份问卷（捕获率97.5%）。没有缺失数据。研究前的捕获率为13.5%，33%的调查有完整数据。患者对该系统的总体可用性评分为良好（平均=1.34，标准差=0.6），评分范围为0-2，其中2表示良好，但表示在鼠标操作方面有困难，并对数据输入环境的隐私性表示担忧。结论：在城市风湿病门诊的常规门诊临床护理中，该系统被证明对于每次就诊的每位患者（大多数情况下）独立自行输入自我报告数据而言易于使用且具有成本效益。
