Osman L M, Abdalla M I, Russell I T, Fiddes J, Friend J A, Legge J S, Douglas J G
Thoracic Medicine Unit, City Hospital, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
Eur Respir J. 1996 Mar;9(3):444-8. doi: 10.1183/09031936.96.09030444.
The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether criteria associated with assignment of asthma patients between general practice (GP) care alone, integrated care (shared between GP care and hospital clinic) or conventional specialist review could be identified, and whether outcomes for these patients differed over the next 12 months. Seven hundred and sixty four patients with a diagnosis of asthma and previously assigned to either integrated care or clinic care were reviewed after 1 year and reassigned. These patients were then followed for another 12 months and clinical data were collected over this time. After 12 months in clinic care or integrated care, assignment to integrated care was predicted by previous participation in integrated care (OR 2.94), patient preference for integrated care (OR 3.7), no admission (OR 1.56), fewer steroid courses during the previous year (OR 0.88) and nonattendance at review (OR 0.43) in the previous 12 months. Patient discharge to GP care was predicted by higher level of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) (OR 1.49), lower number of GP consultations for troublesome asthma (OR 0.78), and nonattendance for review in the preceding year (OR 2.15). In the following 12 months, the three groups of patients differed significantly in hospital admissions (Discharged = 0.008; Integrated = 0.12; Clinic = 0.31), bronchodilators prescribed (Discharged = 8.5; Integrated = 10.2; Clinic = 13.9), GP consultations (Discharged = 1.3; Integrated = 3.0; Clinic = 4.1) and oral steroid courses (Discharged = 0.62; Integrated = 1.7; Clinic = 2.4). Patients assigned to integrated care, clinic care or discharged to general practice care form three distinct patient populations differing retrospectively and prospectively in morbidity and admission risk. In particular, patients assigned to integrated care fall midway in risk and morbidity between those discharged or those retained in clinic care. These results suggest that integrated care provides general practitioners with a system of management for asthma patients, for whom they do not wish frequent specialist review but who they do not believe can safely be discharged to general practice care only.
本研究的目的是调查是否能够确定与哮喘患者分配至单纯全科医疗(GP)护理、综合护理(GP护理与医院门诊共享)或传统专科复诊相关的标准,以及这些患者在接下来12个月中的结局是否存在差异。764例诊断为哮喘且先前已分配至综合护理或门诊护理的患者在1年后接受复查并重新分配。然后对这些患者再随访12个月,并在此期间收集临床数据。在接受门诊护理或综合护理12个月后,先前参与综合护理(比值比[OR] 2.94)、患者对综合护理的偏好(OR 3.7)、未住院(OR 1.56)、前一年使用类固醇疗程较少(OR 0.88)以及在之前12个月未参加复诊(OR 0.43)可预测分配至综合护理。一秒用力呼气量(FEV1)水平较高(OR 1.49)、因哮喘问题进行的GP会诊次数较少(OR 0.78)以及前一年未参加复诊(OR 2.15)可预测患者出院至GP护理。在接下来的12个月中,三组患者在住院次数(出院组 = 0.008;综合护理组 = 0.12;门诊组 = 0.31)、开具支气管扩张剂的数量(出院组 = 8.5;综合护理组 = 10.2;门诊组 = 13.9)、GP会诊次数(出院组 = 1.3;综合护理组 = 3.0;门诊组 = 4.1)以及口服类固醇疗程(出院组 = 0.62;综合护理组 = 1.7;门诊组 = 2.4)方面存在显著差异。分配至综合护理、门诊护理或出院至全科医疗护理的患者形成了三个不同的患者群体,在发病率和入院风险方面存在回顾性和前瞻性差异。特别是,分配至综合护理的患者在风险和发病率方面介于出院患者和留在门诊护理的患者之间。这些结果表明,综合护理为全科医生提供了一种针对哮喘患者患者的管理系统,这些患者不希望频繁接受专科复诊,但全科医生认为他们不能仅安全地出院至全科医疗护理。