Piribauer Franz, Thaler Kylie, Harris Mark F
International Screening Committee for Austria, Austrian Public Health Association, Vienna, Austria.
BMJ Open. 2012 Aug 7;2(4). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000744. Print 2012.
To assess if data collected by a consumer organisation are valid for a health service research study on physicians' performance in preventive care. To report first results of the analysis of physicians performance like consultation time and guideline adherence in history taking.
Secondary data analysis of a clustered cross-sectional direct observation survey.
General practitioners (GPs) in Vienna, Austria, visited unannounced by mystery shoppers (incognito standardised patients (ISPs)).
21 randomly selected GPs were visited by two different ISPs each. 40 observation protocols were realised.
Robustness of sampling and data collection by the consumer organisation. GPs consultation and waiting times, guideline adherence in history taking.
The double stratified random sampling method was robust and representative for the private and contracted GPs mix of Vienna. The clinical scenarios presented by the ISPs were valid and believable, and no GP realised the ISPs were not genuine patients. The average consultation time was 46 min (95% CI 37 to 54 min). Waiting times differed more than consultation times between private and contracted GPs. No differences between private and contracted GPs in terms of adherence to the evidence-based guidelines regarding history taking including questions regarding alcohol use were found. According to the analysis, 20% of the GPs took a perfect history (95% CI 9% to 39%).
The analysis of secondary data collected by a consumer organisation was a valid method for drawing conclusions about GPs preventive practice. Initial results, like consultation times longer than anticipated, and the moderate quality of history taking encourage continuing the analysis on available clinical data.
评估消费者组织收集的数据对于一项关于医生预防保健表现的卫生服务研究是否有效。报告医生表现分析的初步结果,如问诊时间和病史采集过程中对指南的遵循情况。
对一项整群横断面直接观察调查进行二次数据分析。
奥地利维也纳的全科医生(GPs),由暗访人员(匿名标准化患者(ISPs))进行不事先通知的访问。
21名随机选取的全科医生,每位医生接受两名不同的匿名标准化患者的访问。共完成40份观察记录。
消费者组织抽样和数据收集的稳健性。全科医生的问诊和候诊时间,病史采集过程中对指南的遵循情况。
双重分层随机抽样方法对于维也纳私立和签约全科医生的组合具有稳健性和代表性。匿名标准化患者呈现的临床场景有效且可信,没有全科医生意识到匿名标准化患者不是真正的患者。平均问诊时间为46分钟(95%置信区间37至54分钟)。私立和签约全科医生之间的候诊时间差异大于问诊时间差异。在病史采集(包括饮酒相关问题)方面,私立和签约全科医生在遵循循证指南方面未发现差异。根据分析,20%的全科医生进行了完美的病史采集(95%置信区间9%至39%)。
对消费者组织收集的二次数据进行分析是得出关于全科医生预防实践结论的有效方法。初步结果,如问诊时间长于预期,以及病史采集质量中等,促使继续对现有临床数据进行分析。