Suppr超能文献

中国直接面向消费者的远程医疗主导和提供方(公立和私立部门平台)的质量比较:标准化患者研究。

Comparing the Quality of Direct-to-Consumer Telemedicine Dominated and Delivered by Public and Private Sector Platforms in China: Standardized Patient Study.

机构信息

School of Public Health, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

Beijing Luhe Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2024 Nov 14;26:e55400. doi: 10.2196/55400.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Telemedicine is expanding rapidly, with public direct-to-consumer (DTC) telemedicine representing 70% of the market. A key priority is establishing clear quality distinctions between the public and private sectors. No studies have directly compared the quality of DTC telemedicine in the public and private sectors using objective evaluation methods.

OBJECTIVE

Using a standardized patient (SP) approach, this study aimed to compare the quality of DTC telemedicine provided by China's public and private sectors.

METHODS

We recruited 10 SPs presenting fixed cases (urticaria and childhood diarrhea), with 594 interactions between them and physicians. The SPs evaluated various aspects of the quality of care, effectiveness, safety, patient-centeredness (PCC), efficiency, and timeliness using the Institute of Medicine (IOM) quality framework. Ordinary least-squares (OLS) regression models with fixed effects were used for continuous variables, while logistic regression models with fixed effects were used for categorical variables.

RESULTS

Significant quality differences were observed between public and private DTC telemedicine. Physicians from private platforms were significantly more likely to adhere to clinical checklists (adjusted β 15.22, P<.001); provide an accurate diagnosis (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.85, P<.001), an appropriate prescription (adjusted OR 3.87, P<.001), and lifestyle modification advice (adjusted OR 6.82, P<.001); ensure more PCC (adjusted β 3.34, P<.001); and spend more time with SPs (adjusted β 839.70, P<.001), with more responses (adjusted β 1.33, P=.001) and more words (adjusted β 50.93, P=.009). However, SPs on private platforms waited longer for the first response (adjusted β 505.87, P=.001) and each response (adjusted β 168.33, P=.04) and paid more for the average visit (adjusted β 40.03, P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant quality inequality in different DTC telemedicine platforms. Private physicians might provide a higher quality of service regarding effectiveness and safety, PCC, and response times and words. However, private platforms have longer wait times for their first response, as well as higher costs. Refining online reviews, establishing standardized norms and pricing, enhancing the performance evaluation mechanism for public DTC telemedicine, and imposing stricter limitations on the first response time for private physicians should be considered practical approaches to optimizing the management of DTC telemedicine.

摘要

背景

远程医疗正在迅速发展,公众直接面向消费者(DTC)的远程医疗占市场的 70%。一个关键的优先事项是在公共和私营部门之间建立明确的质量区分。没有研究使用客观评估方法直接比较公共和私营部门 DTC 远程医疗的质量。

目的

本研究使用标准化患者(SP)方法,旨在比较中国公共和私营部门 DTC 远程医疗的质量。

方法

我们招募了 10 名呈现固定病例(荨麻疹和儿童腹泻)的 SP,他们与医生进行了 594 次互动。SP 使用医学研究所(IOM)质量框架评估了护理质量、效果、安全性、以患者为中心(PCC)、效率和及时性等各个方面。对于连续变量,使用固定效应的普通最小二乘法(OLS)回归模型,对于分类变量,使用固定效应的逻辑回归模型。

结果

公共和私营 DTC 远程医疗之间存在显著的质量差异。来自私人平台的医生更有可能遵守临床检查表(调整后的β值为 15.22,P<.001);做出准确的诊断(调整后的优势比[OR]为 3.85,P<.001)、适当的处方(调整后的 OR 为 3.87,P<.001)和生活方式改变建议(调整后的 OR 为 6.82,P<.001);确保更高的 PCC(调整后的β值为 3.34,P<.001);与 SP 花费更多时间(调整后的β值为 839.70,P<.001),有更多的回复(调整后的β值为 1.33,P=.001)和更多的单词(调整后的β值为 50.93,P=.009)。然而,SP 在私人平台上等待第一个回复的时间更长(调整后的β值为 505.87,P=.001),每个回复的时间也更长(调整后的β值为 168.33,P=.04),平均每次就诊的费用也更高(调整后的β值为 40.03,P<.001)。

结论

不同的 DTC 远程医疗平台之间存在显著的质量不平等。私人医生在有效性和安全性、PCC 以及响应时间和单词方面可能提供更高质量的服务。然而,私人平台的首次回复等待时间更长,费用也更高。考虑优化 DTC 远程医疗管理的实际方法包括完善在线评价、建立标准化规范和定价、加强公共 DTC 远程医疗绩效评估机制,以及对私人医生的首次回复时间施加更严格的限制。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a1fc/11605261/a18f20835667/jmir_v26i1e55400_fig1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验