Thue G, Sandberg S
Department of Public Health and Primary Health Care, University of Bergen, Norway.
Fam Pract. 1993 Jun;10(2):131-6. doi: 10.1093/fampra/10.2.131.
One way of studying the impact of dry chemistry desk-top instruments in primary care is by comparing users and non-users of this technology with respect to practice setting and changes in everyday practice, as well as to elucidate reasons for not implementing this technology. We therefore mailed a similar questionnaire to all users of the most-used dry chemistry instruments in Norway (n = 298) and to a 14% random sample of general practitioners (n = 381), and a 40% random sample of doctors in occupational health care units (n = 181). The response rate was 77-79% and 200 users and 281 non-users could be included. In general practice, more users were solo practitioners and more users had a cell counter in the office laboratory; fewer occupational health care users kept computerized records. Users reported improvement in diagnosis and treatment and claimed that patient satisfaction had improved. In general, an increase in the number of tests was estimated. Non-users were more pessimistic with regard to improvements in office laboratory service, and stated perceived problems regarding cost, workload and analytical quality as well as good service from the hospital laboratory as reasons for not implementing such instruments in their practice.
研究干式化学台式仪器在基层医疗中的影响的一种方法是，比较该技术的使用者和非使用者在执业环境以及日常实践变化方面的情况，并阐明不采用该技术的原因。因此，我们向挪威使用最广泛的干式化学仪器的所有用户（n = 298）、14%的全科医生随机样本（n = 381）以及职业健康护理单位40%的医生随机样本（n = 181）邮寄了一份类似的调查问卷。回复率为77 - 79%，可以纳入200名使用者和281名非使用者。在全科医疗中，更多使用者是个体执业者，更多使用者在办公室实验室配备了细胞计数器；职业健康护理使用者中保存计算机化记录的较少。使用者报告诊断和治疗有所改善，并声称患者满意度有所提高。总体而言，估计检测数量有所增加。非使用者对办公室实验室服务的改善更为悲观，并指出成本、工作量、分析质量以及医院实验室良好服务等方面的问题是他们在实践中不采用此类仪器的原因。
