Marini Corrado Paolo, Ritter Garry, Sharma Cordelia, McNelis John, Goldberg Michael, Barrera Rafael
Department of Surgery, Westchester Medical Center University Hospital, 100 Woods Rd Taylor Pavilion E 138, Valhalla, NY, 10595, USA.
Long Island Jewish Medical Center, New Hyde Park, NY, USA.
J Robot Surg. 2015 Mar;9(1):51-6. doi: 10.1007/s11701-014-0489-5. Epub 2014 Oct 8.
Robotic telerounding is effective from the standpoint of patients' satisfaction and patients' care in teaching and community hospitals. However, the impact of robotic telerounding by the intensivist rounding remotely in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU), on patients' outcome and on the education of medical students physician assistants and surgical residents, as well as on nurses' satisfaction has not been studied. Prospective evaluation of robotic telerounding (RT) using a Likert Scale measuring tool to assess whether it can replace conventional rounding (CR) from the standpoint of patients' care and outcome, nursing satisfaction, and educational effectiveness. RT did not have a negative impact on patients' outcome during the study interval: mortality 5/42 (12 %) versus 6/37 (16 %), RT versus CR, respectively, p = 0.747. The intensivists rounding in the SICU were satisfied with their ability to deliver the same patients' care remotely (Likert score 4.4 ± 0.2). The educational experience of medical students, physicia assistants, and surgical residents was not affected by RT (average Likert score 4.5 ± 0.2, 3.9 ± 0.4, and 4.4 ± 0.4 for surgical residents, medical students and PAs, respectively, p > 0.05). However, as shown by a Likert score of 3.5 ± 1.0, RT did not meet nurses' expectations from several standpoints. Intensivists regard robotic telerounding as an effective alternative to conventional rounding from the standpoint of patients' care and teaching. Medical students, physician assistants (PA's), and surgical residents do not believe that RT compromises their education. Despite similar patients' outcome, nurses have a less favorable opinion of RT; they believe that the physical presence of the intensivist is favorable at all times.
从患者满意度和教学医院及社区医院的患者护理角度来看，机器人远程查房是有效的。然而，在外科重症监护病房（SICU）由重症监护医生进行远程机器人查房，对患者预后、医学生、医师助理和外科住院医师教育以及护士满意度的影响尚未得到研究。使用李克特量表测量工具对机器人远程查房（RT）进行前瞻性评估，以从患者护理和预后、护理满意度及教育效果的角度评估其是否能取代传统查房（CR）。在研究期间，RT对患者预后没有负面影响：RT组死亡率为5/42（12%），CR组为6/37（16%），p = 0.747。在SICU进行查房的重症监护医生对他们远程提供相同患者护理的能力感到满意（李克特评分为4.4±0.2）。医学生、医师助理和外科住院医师的教育体验不受RT影响（外科住院医师、医学生和医师助理的平均李克特评分分别为4.5±0.2、3.9±0.4和4.4±0.4，p>0.05）。然而，李克特评分为3.5±1.0表明，从几个角度来看，RT未达到护士的期望。从患者护理和教学角度来看，重症监护医生认为机器人远程查房是传统查房的有效替代方式。医学生、医师助理和外科住院医师不认为RT会影响他们的教育。尽管患者预后相似，但护士对RT的看法不太乐观；他们认为重症监护医生始终亲自在场是有利的。
