Martínez-González Nahara Anani, Djalali Sima, Tandjung Ryan, Huber-Geismann Flore, Markun Stefan, Wensing Michel, Rosemann Thomas
Institute of Primary Care, University Hospital Zurich, Pestalozzistrasse 24, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 May 12;14:214. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-214.
In many countries, substitution of physicians by nurses has become common due to the shortage of physicians and the need for high-quality, affordable care, especially for chronic and multi-morbid patients. We examined the evidence on the clinical effectiveness and care costs of physician-nurse substitution in primary care.
We systematically searched OVID Medline and Embase, The Cochrane Library and CINAHL, up to August 2012; selected and critically appraised published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared nurse-led care with care by primary care physicians on patient satisfaction, Quality of Life (QoL), hospital admission, mortality and costs of healthcare. We assessed the individual study risk of bias, calculated the study-specific and pooled relative risks (RR) or standardised mean differences (SMD); and performed fixed-effects meta-analyses.
24 RCTs (38,974 participants) and 2 economic studies met the inclusion criteria. Pooled analyses showed higher overall scores of patient satisfaction with nurse-led care (SMD 0.18, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.23), in RCTs of single contact or urgent care, short (less than 6 months) follow-up episodes and in small trials (N ≤ 200). Nurse-led care was effective at reducing the overall risk of hospital admission (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91), mortality (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.96), in RCTs of on-going or non-urgent care, longer (at least 12 months) follow-up episodes and in larger (N > 200) RCTs. Higher quality RCTs (with better allocation concealment and less attrition) showed higher rates of hospital admissions and mortality with nurse-led care albeit less or not significant. The results seemed more consistent across nurse practitioners than with registered or licensed nurses. The effects of nurse-led care on QoL and costs were difficult to interpret due to heterogeneous outcome reporting, valuation of resources and the small number of studies.
The available evidence continues to be limited by the quality of the research considered. Nurse-led care seems to have a positive effect on patient satisfaction, hospital admission and mortality. This important finding should be confirmed and the determinants of this effect should be assessed in further, larger and more methodically rigorous research.
在许多国家,由于医生短缺以及需要提供高质量、可负担得起的医疗服务,尤其是针对慢性病和多病共存患者的医疗服务,由护士替代医生的情况已变得很普遍。我们研究了基层医疗中医生 - 护士替代在临床疗效和医疗成本方面的证据。
我们系统检索了截至2012年8月的OVID Medline、Embase、Cochrane图书馆和CINAHL;筛选并严格评估已发表的随机对照试验(RCT),这些试验比较了护士主导的护理与基层医疗医生的护理在患者满意度、生活质量(QoL)、住院率、死亡率和医疗成本方面的差异。我们评估了各个研究的偏倚风险,计算了研究特异性和合并的相对风险(RR)或标准化均数差(SMD);并进行了固定效应荟萃分析。
24项RCT(38,974名参与者)和2项经济学研究符合纳入标准。汇总分析显示,在单次接触或紧急护理、随访期短(少于6个月)以及小规模试验(N≤200)的RCT中,患者对护士主导护理的总体满意度得分更高(SMD 0.18,95%CI 0.13至0.23)。在持续或非紧急护理、随访期长(至少12个月)以及大规模(N>200)RCT中,护士主导的护理在降低总体住院风险(RR 0.76,95%CI 0.64至0.91)、死亡率(RR 0.89,95%CI 0.84至0.96)方面有效。质量更高的RCT(分配隐藏更好且失访更少)显示,护士主导护理的住院率和死亡率更高,尽管差异较小或不显著。与注册护士或持牌护士相比,护士从业者的结果似乎更一致。由于结果报告的异质性、资源估值以及研究数量较少,护士主导护理对生活质量和成本的影响难以解释。
现有证据仍然受到所考虑研究质量的限制。护士主导的护理似乎对患者满意度、住院率和死亡率有积极影响。这一重要发现应得到证实,并且应在进一步的、更大规模且方法更严谨的研究中评估这种影响的决定因素。