Monson R A, Jameson J H
Med Care. 1983 Aug;21(8):816-20. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198308000-00005.
The authors undertook this study to determine whether a general medicine clinic in a teaching hospital provided an experience similar in content to that in the office of a general internist. Data on all patient visits to the university clinic during 1979 were collected. Analyses of 4856 visits revealed significant differences (p less than 0.001) in duration of visit, admission rate, and referral rates between the clinic and internists studied by the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS). However, the 12 most common problems seen in the clinic were among the 15 most common problems seen by NAMCS physicians despite some differences in the prevalence of certain diagnoses. Knowing the relative prevalence of specific diagnoses in this setting helps teach cost--benefit principles of ordering diagnostic studies designed to detect uncommon problems. This study supports the value of a teaching hospital ambulatory care experience as preparation for the practice of general internal medicine.
作者开展这项研究是为了确定教学医院的普通内科门诊所提供的经历在内容上是否与普通内科医生办公室的经历相似。收集了1979年期间该大学门诊所有患者就诊的数据。对4856次就诊的分析显示,该门诊与美国国家门诊医疗护理调查(NAMCS)所研究的内科医生在就诊时长、住院率和转诊率方面存在显著差异(p<0.001)。然而,尽管某些诊断的患病率存在一些差异,但该门诊中最常见的12个问题仍在NAMCS医生所见的15个最常见问题之列。了解特定诊断在这种情况下的相对患病率有助于教授关于安排旨在检测罕见问题的诊断研究的成本效益原则。这项研究支持了教学医院门诊护理经历对于普通内科实践准备的价值。