Krishna S, Balas E A, Spencer D C, Griffin J Z, Boren S A
Medical Informatics Group, School of Medicine, University of Missouri-Columbia 65211, USA.
J Fam Pract. 1997 Jul;45(1):25-33.
A systematic review of randomized clinical trials was conducted to evaluate the acceptability and usefulness of computerized patient education interventions. The Columbia Registry, MEDLINE, Health, BIOSIS, and CINAHL bibliographic databases were searched. Selection was based on the following criteria: (1) randomized controlled clinical trials, (2) educational patient-computer interaction, and (3) effect measured on the process or outcome of care. Twenty-two studies met the selection criteria. Of these, 13 (59%) used instructional programs for educational intervention. Five studies (22.7%) tested information support networks, and four (18%) evaluated systems for health assessment and history-taking. The most frequently targeted clinical application area was diabetes mellitus (n = 7). All studies, except one on the treatment of alcoholism, reported positive results for interactive educational intervention. All diabetes education studies, in particular, reported decreased blood glucose levels among patients exposed to this intervention. Computerized educational interventions can lead to improved health status in several major areas of care, and appear not to be a substitute for, but a valuable supplement to, face-to-face time with physicians.
开展了一项对随机临床试验的系统评价，以评估计算机化患者教育干预措施的可接受性和有用性。检索了哥伦比亚注册数据库、MEDLINE、Health、BIOSIS和CINAHL书目数据库。选择基于以下标准：（1）随机对照临床试验；（2）患者与计算机的教育互动；（3）对护理过程或结果的影响进行测量。22项研究符合选择标准。其中，13项（59%）使用教学程序进行教育干预。5项研究（22.7%）测试了信息支持网络，4项（18%）评估了健康评估和病史采集系统。最常针对的临床应用领域是糖尿病（n = 7）。除了一项关于酒精中毒治疗的研究外，所有研究均报告了交互式教育干预的积极结果。特别是所有糖尿病教育研究均报告，接受该干预的患者血糖水平有所下降。计算机化教育干预可在几个主要护理领域改善健康状况，而且似乎不是替代与医生面对面交流的方式，而是对其的宝贵补充。
