Prins A H, Abu-Hanna A
Academic Medical Center, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Department of Medical Informatics, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Methods Inf Med. 2007;46(6):629-35.
To elicit and analyze information needs of patients and primary care physicians (GPs) regarding the information services (static and functional) that a GP's practice website should provide.
To find candidate information services, we conducted a literature search and examined primary care physicians' websites, especially Dutch websites. Semi-structured depth interviews with the stakeholders, Dutch patients and GPs, were done to arrive at a final checklist. We then conducted a survey to elicit the level of importance associated with each service on the checklist. The data underwent statistical analysis and relevant requirements were formulated. The requirements were then validated by interviews. General website quality and usability aspects were elicited from the literature.
The research resulted in a checklist of 38 selected information services including their priority ratings for patients and GPs; a discrepancy list between GP and patient priorities; and a requirements document containing information services (14 static and 6 functional), and general quality and usability aspects (8 and 5).
The following items occurred in the top 10 of both user groups: general practice information, information of local public health institutions, self-help information, repeat prescription, links to health web sites. At the bottom on both priority lists were: links to journals, tests and forums. Dutch GPs are much more selective in terms of which information services to provide on-line. Discrepancy between the two groups concerns on-line services that seem to require a change to the GP's workflow, or those services that are not recognized for reimbursing the GP. Although the Dutch patients' requirements seem to generalize to other patients, the conflict list might depend on the primary care system.
了解并分析患者及基层医疗医生（全科医生）对于全科医生诊所网站应提供的信息服务（静态和功能性）的信息需求。
为了找到候选信息服务，我们进行了文献检索并考察了基层医疗医生的网站，尤其是荷兰的网站。我们对利益相关者、荷兰患者和全科医生进行了半结构化深度访谈，以得出最终清单。然后我们开展了一项调查，以了解清单上各项服务的重要程度。对数据进行了统计分析并制定了相关要求。随后通过访谈对这些要求进行了验证。从文献中获取了一般网站质量和可用性方面的信息。
该研究得出了一份包含38项选定信息服务的清单，其中包括患者和全科医生对这些服务的优先级评级；一份全科医生和患者优先级之间的差异清单；以及一份要求文档，其中包含信息服务（14项静态和6项功能性），以及一般质量和可用性方面的信息（8项和5项）。
以下项目在两个用户群体的前10项中都出现了：全科医疗信息、当地公共卫生机构信息、自助信息、重复处方、健康网站链接。两个优先级列表中排在最后的是：期刊链接、测试和论坛。荷兰全科医生在选择提供哪些在线信息服务方面更为挑剔。两组之间的差异涉及那些似乎需要改变全科医生工作流程的在线服务，或者那些不被认可用于报销全科医生费用的服务。尽管荷兰患者的需求似乎可以推广到其他患者，但冲突清单可能取决于基层医疗系统。
