Telemedical Second Opinions in Germany: A Customer Survey of an Online Portal.

IF 0.6 2区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte Pub Date : 2022-04-08 DOI:10.1089/tmj.2022.0070
Nadja Könsgen, Barbara Prediger, Anna Schlimbach, Ana-Mihaela Bora, Victoria Weißflog, Jan-Christoph Loh, Dunja Bruch, Dawid Pieper
{"title":"Telemedical Second Opinions in Germany: A Customer Survey of an Online Portal.","authors":"Nadja Könsgen, Barbara Prediger, Anna Schlimbach, Ana-Mihaela Bora, Victoria Weißflog, Jan-Christoph Loh, Dunja Bruch, Dawid Pieper","doi":"10.1089/tmj.2022.0070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> Second medical opinions (SOs) can strengthen patients' certainty in decision making. In Germany, both personally delivered and telemedical SOs (often based on documents only) are provided. Our aim was to analyze the experiences of people who obtained telemedical SOs. We also investigated different routes of SO delivery (personally/by phone/documents only). <b>Materials and Methods:</b> German residents who obtained a telemedical SO via an online portal between January 2016 and February 2019 (<i>n</i> = 1,247) were contacted by post between August and November 2019 up to three times. The results were analyzed descriptively. <b>Results:</b> The 368 participants (response rate 30%) were 54% male, 95% statutory health insured, and 61 years old (median; interquartile range 51-72). Approximately 75% were (rather) satisfied with obtaining the SO via the online portal. The most preferred route of SO delivery was a personally delivered SO, which 80% would (rather) consider, followed by 70% (rather) considering SOs based on documents only and 48% (rather) considering SOs by phone. The most often mentioned advantage of telemedical SOs was independence of time and place, while the most important disadvantage was the standardized process resulting in a lack of direct and personal contact between the patient and the physician. <b>Discussion:</b> Although our results show that SOs (based on documents only) support patients and that patient satisfaction was high, personally delivered SOs were still preferred. Future research on the use of SOs based on documents only (in which patient population and in what situations) is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":55388,"journal":{"name":"Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2022.0070","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Second medical opinions (SOs) can strengthen patients' certainty in decision making. In Germany, both personally delivered and telemedical SOs (often based on documents only) are provided. Our aim was to analyze the experiences of people who obtained telemedical SOs. We also investigated different routes of SO delivery (personally/by phone/documents only). Materials and Methods: German residents who obtained a telemedical SO via an online portal between January 2016 and February 2019 (n = 1,247) were contacted by post between August and November 2019 up to three times. The results were analyzed descriptively. Results: The 368 participants (response rate 30%) were 54% male, 95% statutory health insured, and 61 years old (median; interquartile range 51-72). Approximately 75% were (rather) satisfied with obtaining the SO via the online portal. The most preferred route of SO delivery was a personally delivered SO, which 80% would (rather) consider, followed by 70% (rather) considering SOs based on documents only and 48% (rather) considering SOs by phone. The most often mentioned advantage of telemedical SOs was independence of time and place, while the most important disadvantage was the standardized process resulting in a lack of direct and personal contact between the patient and the physician. Discussion: Although our results show that SOs (based on documents only) support patients and that patient satisfaction was high, personally delivered SOs were still preferred. Future research on the use of SOs based on documents only (in which patient population and in what situations) is needed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
德国远程医疗第二意见:在线门户网站客户调查。
引言第二医疗意见(SO)可以增强患者做出决定时的确定性。在德国,既有亲自送达的第二医疗意见,也有远程医疗意见(通常仅基于文件)。我们的目的是分析人们获得远程医疗第二医疗意见的经历。我们还调查了提供《手术申请表》的不同途径(亲自递送/电话递送/仅凭文件递送)。材料和方法:从 2016 年 1 月到 2019 年 2 月,通过在线门户网站获得远程医疗 SO 的德国居民(n = 1,247 人)在 2019 年 8 月到 11 月期间通过邮局联系了他们,最多联系了三次。对结果进行了描述性分析。结果:368 名参与者(回复率为 30%)中,54% 为男性,95% 有法定医疗保险,61 岁(中位数;四分位数间距为 51-72)。约 75% 的人对通过在线门户网站获取《战略计划》感到(相当)满意。最喜欢的《战略计划书》递送途径是亲自递送,80% 的人会(更愿意)考虑这种途径,其次是 70%(更愿意)考虑仅根据文件递送《战略计划书》,48%(更愿意)考虑通过电话递送《战略计划书》。人们最常提到的远程医疗手术的优点是不受时间和地点的限制,而最重要的缺点是标准化流程导致患者与医生之间缺乏直接的个人接触。讨论:尽管我们的研究结果表明,SO(仅基于文件)为患者提供了支持,而且患者的满意度很高,但亲自提供的 SO 仍是首选。今后需要对仅以文件为基础的《手术指南》的使用情况(在哪些患者群体和哪些情况下)进行研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte
Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte 社会科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
16.70%
发文量
43
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Die Geschichte der Wissenschaften ist in erster Linie eine Geschichte der Ideen und Entdeckungen, oft genug aber auch der Moden, Irrtümer und Missverständnisse. Sie hängt eng mit der Entwicklung kultureller und zivilisatorischer Leistungen zusammen und bleibt von der politischen Geschichte keineswegs unberührt.
期刊最新文献
Inhaltsverzeichnis: Ber. Wissenschaftsgesch. 4/2024 Titelbild: (Ber. Wissenschaftsgesch. 4/2024) To Eat or Not to Eat: The Donkey as Food and Medicine in Chinese Society from the Medieval Period to the Qing Dynasty A Promising Tropical Medicinal Plant: Taiwan as the Production Hub of Japan's Coca Empire** The British Missionaries’ Attempts to Identify Chinese Medicine**
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1