Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (S.A., Y.P.K.).
Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio (T.R.B.).
Ann Intern Med. 2020 May 19;172(10):641-647. doi: 10.7326/M19-3852. Epub 2020 Apr 14.
Electronic consultations (e-consults) can facilitate patient access to specialists, minimize travel, and reduce unnecessary in-person visits. However, metrics to enable study of e-consults and their effect on processes and patient care are lacking.
To assess novel metrics of e-consult appropriateness and utility.
Retrospective cohort study.
Primary and specialty care practices at 2 large academic and 2 community hospitals of an integrated health system.
Patients with e-consult requests to 5 specialties-hematology, infectious disease, dermatology, rheumatology, and psychiatry-between October 2017 and November 2018.
The appropriateness of e-consult inquiries was assessed by review of medical records and defined as meeting the following 4 criteria: not answerable by reviewing evidence-based summary sources ("point-of-care resource test"), not merely requesting logistic information, having appropriate clinical urgency, and having appropriate patient complexity. Interrater agreement in assessments of e-consult appropriateness was assessed by the κ statistic. Utility of e-consults was assessed by the rate of avoided visits (AVs), defined by the absence of an in-person visit to the same specialty within 120 days.
Overall, 6512 eligible e-consults were made by 1096 referring providers to 121 specialist consultants. Inquiries were characterized as diagnostic, therapeutic, for provider education, or at the request of the patient. Most consultations were answered within 1 day, with variation across specialties (73.1% for psychiatry to 87.8% for infectious disease). Overall, 70.2% of e-consults met all 4 criteria for appropriateness; the frequency of unmet criteria varied among specialties. Raters agreed on the appropriateness of 94% of e-consults (κ = 0.57 [95% CI, 0.36 to 0.79]), indicating moderate agreement. The overall rate of AVs across the 5 specialties was 81.2%; the highest rate was in psychiatry (92.6%) and the lowest in dermatology (61.9%).
Generalizability is unknown outside a single integrated health system, where requesting and consulting providers share a common electronic health record.
Novel metrics to assess the appropriateness and utility of e-consults provide meaningful insight into practice, provide a rubric for comparison in future studies in additional settings, and suggest areas to improve resource use and patient care.
None.
电子咨询(e-consult)可以方便患者获得专家意见,减少旅行,并减少不必要的当面就诊。然而,目前缺乏用于研究电子咨询及其对流程和患者护理影响的衡量标准。
评估电子咨询适宜性和实用性的新指标。
回顾性队列研究。
一家综合性医疗系统的 2 家学术医院和 2 家社区医院的初级保健和专科门诊。
2017 年 10 月至 2018 年 11 月期间,向血液科、传染病科、皮肤科、风湿病科和精神病科等 5 个专科提出电子咨询请求的患者。
通过查阅病历评估电子咨询查询的适宜性,并将其定义为符合以下 4 项标准:不能通过查阅基于证据的总结资源(“即时资源测试”)回答,不仅仅是请求后勤信息,具有适当的临床紧迫性,以及具有适当的患者复杂性。通过κ统计评估评估电子咨询适宜性的评估者间一致性。通过避免就诊率(AV)评估电子咨询的实用性,AV 定义为在 120 天内同一专科没有进行面对面就诊。
共有 1096 名转诊医生向 121 名专科顾问提出了 6512 项符合条件的电子咨询。咨询内容包括诊断、治疗、提供医生教育或患者要求。大多数咨询在 1 天内得到答复,不同专科之间存在差异(精神病科为 73.1%,传染病科为 87.8%)。总体而言,70.2%的电子咨询符合所有 4 项适宜性标准;不符合标准的频率因专科而异。评估者对 94%的电子咨询适宜性达成一致(κ=0.57[95%CI,0.36 至 0.79]),表明存在中度一致性。5 个专科的总体 AV 率为 81.2%;精神病科最高(92.6%),皮肤科最低(61.9%)。
在单个综合性医疗系统之外,其推广性尚不清楚,因为请求者和咨询者共享一个共同的电子健康记录。
评估电子咨询适宜性和实用性的新指标为实践提供了有意义的见解,为在其他环境下的进一步研究提供了比较的标准,并提示了改善资源利用和患者护理的方向。
无。