McKinstry Brian, Watson Philip, Pinnock Hilary, Heaney David, Sheikh Aziz
Centre of Population Health Sciences: General Practice Section, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Br J Gen Pract. 2009 Jun;59(563):e209-18. doi: 10.3399/bjgp09X420941.
Internationally, there is increasing use of telephone consultations, particularly for triaging requests for acute care. However, little is known about how this mode of consulting differs from face-to-face encounters.
To understand patient and healthcare-staff perspectives on how telephone consulting differs from face-to-face consulting in terms of content, quality, and safety, and how it can be most appropriately incorporated into routine health care.
Focus groups triangulated by a national questionnaire.
Primary care in urban and rural Scotland.
Fifteen focus groups (n = 91) were conducted with GPs, nurses, administrative staff, and patients, purposively sampled to attain a maximum-variation sample. Findings were triangulated by a national questionnaire.
Telephone consulting evolved in urban areas mainly to manage demand, while in rural areas it developed to overcome geographical problems and maintain continuity of care for patients. While telephone consulting was generally seen to provide improved access, clinicians expressed strong concerns about safety potentially being compromised, largely as a result of lack of formal and informal examination. Concerns were, to an extent, allayed when clinicians and patients knew each other well.
Used appropriately, telephone consulting enhances access to health care, aids continuity, and saves time and travelling for patients. The current emphasis on use for acute triage, however, worried clinicians and patients. Given these findings, and until the safe use of telephone triage is fully understood and agreed upon by stakeholders, policymakers and clinicians should consider using the telephone primarily for managing follow-up appointments when diagnostic assessment has already been undertaken.
在国际上,电话咨询的使用越来越多,尤其是用于对急性护理请求进行分诊。然而,对于这种咨询方式与面对面会诊有何不同,人们知之甚少。
了解患者和医护人员对于电话咨询在内容、质量和安全性方面与面对面咨询有何不同,以及如何最恰当地将其纳入常规医疗保健的看法。
通过全国性问卷进行焦点小组三角互证法研究。
苏格兰城乡的初级医疗保健机构。
与全科医生、护士、行政人员和患者进行了15个焦点小组讨论(n = 91),采用目的抽样以获得最大差异样本。研究结果通过全国性问卷进行三角互证。
电话咨询在城市地区主要是为了管理需求而发展起来的,而在农村地区,它的发展是为了克服地理问题并保持患者护理的连续性。虽然电话咨询总体上被认为能改善医疗服务的可及性,但临床医生对安全性可能受到影响表示强烈担忧,这主要是由于缺乏正式和非正式检查。当临床医生和患者彼此非常熟悉时,这种担忧在一定程度上得到了缓解。
如果使用得当,电话咨询可以提高医疗服务的可及性,有助于护理的连续性,并为患者节省时间和出行成本。然而,目前对急性分诊用途的强调让临床医生和患者感到担忧。鉴于这些发现,在利益相关者充分理解并就电话分诊的安全使用达成一致之前,政策制定者和临床医生应考虑在已经进行诊断评估后,主要将电话用于安排随访预约。