Suppr超能文献

一种用于衡量医生诊疗中糖尿病护理情况的三部分模型。

A three-part model for measuring diabetes care in physician practice.

作者信息

Lipner Rebecca S, Weng Weifeng, Arnold Gerald K, Duffy F Daniel, Lynn Lorna A, Holmboe Eric S

机构信息

American Board of Internal Medicine, 510 Walnut Street, Suite 1700, Philadelphia, PA 19106-3699, USA.

出版信息

Acad Med. 2007 Oct;82(10 Suppl):S48-52. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31814027b1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

To assess the psychometric properties of the three components of the Diabetes Practice Improvement Module, to compare reliabilities of composites to individual measures, and to identify associations among practice-based and patient-based measures.

METHOD

Data include practice systems surveys of 626 physicians, 13,965 chart audits, and 12,927 patient surveys. Quality composites were identified using factor analysis. Means with reliabilities (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] and Cronbach's alpha) are reported. Associations among patient-based quality measures and practice measures with case-mix adjustments were estimated via hierarchical models.

RESULTS

Composite ICCs range from 0.11 to 0.54, and single items range from 0.05 to 0.49. Staff communication, efficiency, care access, and patient knowledge correlate with patient satisfaction (P < .001). Clinical outcomes are associated with clinical processes (e.g., annual foot exam) and appropriate treatment (P < .001). Patient adjusters (e.g., overall health or factors limiting self-care) are important for the models; physician characteristics used (e.g., age, practice size) seem less important.

CONCLUSIONS

Composites require smaller patient sample sizes and result in more reliable measures than do individual items. Additionally, the data show meaningful relationships between composites; physician-directed components (i.e., clinical processes and treatments) are related to clinical outcomes, and patients are clearly more satisfied with care if it is easily accessible and if communication about care is good.

摘要

背景

评估糖尿病实践改进模块三个组成部分的心理测量特性,比较综合指标与单项指标的可靠性,并确定基于实践和基于患者的指标之间的关联。

方法

数据包括对626名医生的实践系统调查、13965次病历审核和12927次患者调查。使用因子分析确定质量综合指标。报告了具有可靠性(组内相关系数[ICC]和克朗巴哈系数)的均值。通过分层模型估计基于患者的质量指标与经病例组合调整的实践指标之间的关联。

结果

综合指标的ICC范围为0.11至0.54,单项指标范围为0.05至0.49。员工沟通、效率、医疗服务可及性和患者知识与患者满意度相关(P <.001)。临床结果与临床流程(如年度足部检查)和适当治疗相关(P <.001)。患者调整因素(如总体健康状况或限制自我护理的因素)对模型很重要;所使用的医生特征(如年龄、诊所规模)似乎不太重要。

结论

与单项指标相比,综合指标所需的患者样本量较小,且测量结果更可靠。此外,数据显示综合指标之间存在有意义的关系;医生主导的组成部分(即临床流程和治疗)与临床结果相关,如果医疗服务易于获得且护理沟通良好,患者对护理显然会更满意。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验