Schectman J M, Elinsky E G, Pawlson L G
George Washington University Health Plan, Washington, DC 20037.
QRB Qual Rev Bull. 1992 Feb;18(2):60-2. doi: 10.1016/s0097-5990(16)30508-5.
To determine the accuracy of clinician self-reports, 38 clinicians were surveyed in a university-based health maintenance organization (HMO) practice on their thyroid function testing (TFT) patterns one year after the distribution of an educational intervention (the intervention). The mean of the absolute difference between self-reported and actual test ordering rates was 12%; the difference was greater than 20% for only 3 of 33 clinicians who ordered TFT for at least five patients during the study period. A strong association was found between self-reported change and the actual mean change in TFT postintervention ordering rates (p less than 0.0001). Results suggest that clinicians, at least in certain settings, can accurately estimate their utilization patterns and the effect of practice guidelines.
为了确定临床医生自我报告的准确性,在一项基于大学的健康维护组织(HMO)实践中,对38名临床医生进行了调查,了解他们在一项教育干预措施(该干预)分发一年后的甲状腺功能测试(TFT)模式。自我报告的测试订购率与实际测试订购率之间的绝对差异平均值为12%;在研究期间为至少五名患者订购TFT的33名临床医生中,只有3人的差异大于20%。在自我报告的变化与干预后TFT订购率的实际平均变化之间发现了强烈的关联(p小于0.0001)。结果表明,临床医生至少在某些情况下,可以准确估计他们的使用模式和实践指南的效果。