Green L A, Niebauer L J, Miller R S, Lutz L J
Ambulatory Sentinel Practice Network, Inc., Denver.
Fam Med. 1991 Aug;23(6):447-9.
Now that primary care practice-based research networks are known to be feasible, it is important to learn more about the reasons practices participate and withdraw. The Ambulatory Sentinel Practice Network (ASPN) experience presents a special opportunity to study 32 practices that withdrew from the Network since it began in 1982. One hundred percent of these practices responded to a structured telephone survey. The desire to be part of a group doing research (47%) and response to recruitment by an esteemed colleague (28%) were the most important reasons for joining the Network. Changes within the practice (50%), the additional burdens associated with ASPN (22%), and lack of support among practice colleagues and staff (13%) were the most important reasons for withdrawing. Six suggestions were made that could have helped these practices continue in ASPN. Thirteen percent of practices that withdrew rejoined the Network at a later date. Eight years after initiating investigations, 70% of the practices that were ever part of ASPN remained fully involved.
既然以基层医疗实践为基础的研究网络已被证明是可行的,那么进一步了解医疗机构参与及退出的原因就很重要。门诊哨点实践网络(ASPN)的经历提供了一个特别的机会,来研究自1982年该网络成立以来退出的32家医疗机构。这些机构100%回应了一项结构化电话调查。希望成为从事研究的团体的一员(47%)以及对一位受尊敬的同事招募的回应(28%)是加入该网络的最重要原因。机构内部的变化(50%)、与ASPN相关的额外负担(22%)以及机构同事和工作人员缺乏支持(13%)是退出的最重要原因。提出了六项建议,这些建议本可帮助这些机构继续留在ASPN。13%退出的机构后来重新加入了该网络。在开始调查八年后,曾是ASPN一部分的机构中有70%仍完全参与其中。