Suppr超能文献

门诊医疗环境中虚拟护理的质量措施:范围综述。

Quality measures of virtual care in ambulatory healthcare environments: a scoping review.

机构信息

Ted Rogers Centre for Heart Research, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2024 Apr 2;14(4):e078214. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078214.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Delivery of virtual care increased throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and persisted after physical distancing measures ended. However, little is known about how to measure the quality of virtual care, as current measures focus on in-person care and may not apply to a virtual context. This scoping review aims to understand the connections between virtual care modalities used with ambulatory patient populations and quality measures across the Quintuple Aim (provider experience, patient experience, per capita cost, population health and health equity).

DESIGN

Virtual care was considered any interaction between patients and/or their circle of care occurring remotely using any form of information technology. Five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, JBI) and grey literature sources (11 websites, 3 search engines) were searched from 2015 to June 2021 and again in August 2022 for publications that analysed virtual care in ambulatory settings. Indicators were extracted, double-coded into the Quintuple Aim framework; patient and provider experience indicators were further categorised based on the National Academy of Medicine quality framework (safety, effectiveness, patient-centredness, timeliness, efficiency and equity). Sustainability was added to capture the potential for continued use of virtual care.

RESULTS

13 504 citations were double-screened resulting in 631 full-text articles, 66 of which were included. Common modalities included video or audio visits (n=43), remote monitoring (n=11) and mobile applications (n=11). The most common quality indicators were related to patient experience (n=58 articles), followed by provider experience (n=25 articles), population health outcomes (n=23 articles) and health system costs (n=19 articles).

CONCLUSIONS

The connections between virtual care modalities and quality domains identified here can inform clinicians, administrators and other decision-makers how to monitor the quality of virtual care and provide insights into gaps in current quality measures. The next steps include the development of a balanced scorecard of virtual care quality indicators for ambulatory settings to inform quality improvement.

摘要

目的

在 COVID-19 大流行期间,虚拟护理的提供有所增加,并在物理距离措施结束后持续存在。然而,对于如何衡量虚拟护理的质量知之甚少,因为目前的衡量标准侧重于面对面护理,而可能不适用于虚拟环境。本范围综述旨在了解与门诊患者群体使用的虚拟护理模式以及五重目标(提供者体验、患者体验、人均成本、人群健康和健康公平)相关的质量衡量标准之间的联系。

设计

虚拟护理被认为是患者和/或他们的护理圈使用任何形式的信息技术远程进行的任何交互。从 2015 年到 2021 年 6 月,以及 2022 年 8 月,我们在五个数据库(MEDLINE、Embase、PsycInfo、Cochrane 图书馆、JBI)和灰色文献来源(11 个网站、3 个搜索引擎)中搜索了分析门诊环境中虚拟护理的出版物。提取指标,双码入五重目标框架;根据国家医学科学院质量框架(安全性、有效性、以患者为中心、及时性、效率和公平性)进一步对患者和提供者体验指标进行分类。可持续性被添加以捕捉虚拟护理持续使用的潜力。

结果

双重筛选了 13504 条引用,导致 631 篇全文文章,其中 66 篇被包括在内。常见模式包括视频或音频访问(n=43)、远程监测(n=11)和移动应用程序(n=11)。最常见的质量指标与患者体验有关(n=58 篇文章),其次是提供者体验(n=25 篇文章)、人群健康结果(n=23 篇文章)和卫生系统成本(n=19 篇文章)。

结论

这里确定的虚拟护理模式与质量领域之间的联系可以为临床医生、管理人员和其他决策者提供信息,了解如何监测虚拟护理的质量,并洞察当前质量衡量标准中的差距。下一步包括为门诊环境制定虚拟护理质量指标的平衡记分卡,以促进质量改进。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/701b/10989112/c4dfa133f44f/bmjopen-2023-078214f01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验