Eldredge Jonathan D, Hall Laura J, McElfresh Karen R, Warner Teddy D, Stromberg Tiffany L, Trost Jaren, Jelinek Devin A
J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Jan;104(1):33-41. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.1.005.
The research determined the usage and satisfaction levels with one of two point-of-care (PoC) resources among health care providers in a rural state.
In this randomized controlled trial, twenty-eight health care providers in rural areas were stratified by occupation and region, then randomized into either the DynaMed or the AccessMedicine study arm. Study participants were physicians, physician assistants, and nurses. A pre- and post-study survey measured participants' attitudes toward different information resources and their information-seeking activities. Medical student investigators provided training and technical support for participants. Data analyses consisted of analysis of variance (ANOVA), paired t tests, and Cohen's d statistic to compare pre- and post-study effects sizes.
Participants in both the DynaMed and the AccessMedicine arms of the study reported increased satisfaction with their respective PoC resource, as expected. Participants in both arms also reported that they saved time in finding needed information. At baseline, both arms reported too little information available, which increased to "about right amounts of information" at the completion of the study. DynaMed users reported a Cohen's d increase of +1.50 compared to AccessMedicine users' reported use of 0.82. DynaMed users reported d2 satisfaction increases of 9.48 versus AccessMedicine satisfaction increases of 0.59 using a Cohen's d.
Participants in the DynaMed arm of the study used this clinically oriented PoC more heavily than the users of the textbook-based AccessMedicine. In terms of user satisfaction, DynaMed users reported higher levels of satisfaction than the users of AccessMedicine.
本研究确定了某乡村州医疗服务提供者对两种即时医疗(PoC)资源之一的使用情况和满意度水平。
在这项随机对照试验中,28名农村地区的医疗服务提供者按职业和地区分层,然后随机分为DynaMed或AccessMedicine研究组。研究参与者包括医生、医师助理和护士。一项研究前和研究后的调查测量了参与者对不同信息资源的态度及其信息寻求活动。医学生调查员为参与者提供培训和技术支持。数据分析包括方差分析(ANOVA)、配对t检验和科恩d统计量,以比较研究前和研究后的效应大小。
正如预期的那样,研究中DynaMed组和AccessMedicine组的参与者均报告对各自的即时医疗资源的满意度有所提高。两组参与者还报告说,他们在查找所需信息时节省了时间。在基线时,两组均报告可用信息太少,而在研究结束时增加到“信息数量合适”。与AccessMedicine用户报告的0.82相比,DynaMed用户报告的科恩d增加了+1.50。使用科恩d统计量,DynaMed用户报告的满意度d2增加了9.48,而AccessMedicine用户的满意度增加了0.59。
研究中DynaMed组的参与者比基于教科书的AccessMedicine用户更频繁地使用这种以临床为导向的即时医疗资源。在用户满意度方面,DynaMed用户报告的满意度水平高于AccessMedicine用户。