它的最大价值在于让病人在正确的时间得到正确的人的诊治":临床医生对专职医疗初级接触护理模式价值的看法。

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES International Journal for Quality in Health Care Pub Date : 2024-03-05 DOI:10.1093/intqhc/mzae021
Caitlin Brandenburg, Elizabeth C Ward, Maria Schwarz, Michelle Palmer, Carina Hartley, Joshua Byrnes, Anne Coccetti, Rachel Phillips, Laurelie R Wishart
{"title":"它的最大价值在于让病人在正确的时间得到正确的人的诊治\":临床医生对专职医疗初级接触护理模式价值的看法。","authors":"Caitlin Brandenburg, Elizabeth C Ward, Maria Schwarz, Michelle Palmer, Carina Hartley, Joshua Byrnes, Anne Coccetti, Rachel Phillips, Laurelie R Wishart","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Allied health primary contact clinic models of care have increasingly been used as a strategy to increase public health service capacity. A recent systematic review found little consistency or agreement on how primary contact clinics are evaluated. The concept of value of primary contact clinics, which has important implications for evaluation, has not yet been explored in-depth. To explore allied health clinicians' perceptions of the value of allied health primary contact clinics, with the goal of informing an evaluation framework, a descriptive qualitative approach utilizing semi-structured interviews was employed. Participants included allied health staff embedded in clinical lead roles within primary contact clinics across four acute care hospitals in a metropolitan health service located in South-East Queensland, Australia. Lead staff from 30 identified primary contact clinic models in the health service were approached to take part via email. All eligible participants who provided consent were included. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used. A total of 23 clinicians (n = 23) representing 22 diverse models of primary contact clinics participated. Most participants were physiotherapists, dietitians, or occupational therapists, although speech pathology, audiology, and podiatry were also represented. Participant perceptions of the 'value' of PCCs were a highly complex phenomenon, comprising five intersecting domains: (i) patient satisfaction; (ii) clinical outcomes; (iii) care pathway and resource use; (iv) health service performance; and (v) staff satisfaction and professional standing. These five core value domains were positively or negatively influenced by 12 perceived benefits and 8 perceived drawbacks, respectively. Value domains were also highly interrelated and impacted upon each other. The concept of 'value' relating to primary contact clinics involves multiple intersecting domains encompassing different perspectives. This study highlighted potential benefits and drawbacks of primary contact clinics that have not yet been measured or explored in the literature, and as such may be useful for healthcare administrators to consider. The findings of this study will inform an evaluation framework including health economics calculator for primary contact clinics.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"'The big value of it is getting the patient seen by the right person at the right time': clinician perceptions of the value of allied health primary contact models of care.\",\"authors\":\"Caitlin Brandenburg, Elizabeth C Ward, Maria Schwarz, Michelle Palmer, Carina Hartley, Joshua Byrnes, Anne Coccetti, Rachel Phillips, Laurelie R Wishart\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/intqhc/mzae021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Allied health primary contact clinic models of care have increasingly been used as a strategy to increase public health service capacity. A recent systematic review found little consistency or agreement on how primary contact clinics are evaluated. The concept of value of primary contact clinics, which has important implications for evaluation, has not yet been explored in-depth. To explore allied health clinicians' perceptions of the value of allied health primary contact clinics, with the goal of informing an evaluation framework, a descriptive qualitative approach utilizing semi-structured interviews was employed. Participants included allied health staff embedded in clinical lead roles within primary contact clinics across four acute care hospitals in a metropolitan health service located in South-East Queensland, Australia. Lead staff from 30 identified primary contact clinic models in the health service were approached to take part via email. All eligible participants who provided consent were included. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used. A total of 23 clinicians (n = 23) representing 22 diverse models of primary contact clinics participated. Most participants were physiotherapists, dietitians, or occupational therapists, although speech pathology, audiology, and podiatry were also represented. Participant perceptions of the 'value' of PCCs were a highly complex phenomenon, comprising five intersecting domains: (i) patient satisfaction; (ii) clinical outcomes; (iii) care pathway and resource use; (iv) health service performance; and (v) staff satisfaction and professional standing. These five core value domains were positively or negatively influenced by 12 perceived benefits and 8 perceived drawbacks, respectively. Value domains were also highly interrelated and impacted upon each other. The concept of 'value' relating to primary contact clinics involves multiple intersecting domains encompassing different perspectives. This study highlighted potential benefits and drawbacks of primary contact clinics that have not yet been measured or explored in the literature, and as such may be useful for healthcare administrators to consider. The findings of this study will inform an evaluation framework including health economics calculator for primary contact clinics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal for Quality in Health Care\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal for Quality in Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae021\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae021","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作为提高公共卫生服务能力的一种策略,专职医疗初级联络诊所的护理模式已被越来越多地采用。最近的一项系统性综述发现,在如何评估初级联络诊所方面几乎没有一致性或共识。初级联络诊所的价值概念对评估有重要影响,但尚未得到深入探讨。为了探讨专职医疗临床医生对专职医疗基层联络诊所价值的看法,以便为评估框架提供信息,我们采用了半结构化访谈的描述性定性方法。参与者包括在澳大利亚昆士兰州东南部一个大都市医疗服务机构的四家急症护理医院的初级联络诊所中担任临床领导角色的专职医疗人员。研究人员通过电子邮件联系了该医疗服务机构中 30 个已确定的初级联络诊所模式的主要工作人员。所有征得同意的合格参与者均被纳入研究范围。采用归纳式主题分析方法。共有 23 名临床医生(n = 23)参与了研究,他们代表了 22 种不同的初级联络诊所模式。大多数参与者是物理治疗师、营养师或职业治疗师,但也有语言病理学、听力学和足病学的代表。参与者对初级联络诊所 "价值 "的看法是一个非常复杂的现象,包括五个相互交叉的领域:(i) 患者满意度;(ii) 临床结果;(iii) 护理路径和资源使用;(iv) 医疗服务绩效;以及 (v) 员工满意度和专业地位。这五个核心价值领域分别受到 12 个感知到的益处和 8 个感知到的弊端的积极或消极影响。价值领域之间也高度相关,并相互影响。与基层联络诊所有关的 "价值 "概念涉及多个相互交叉的领域,涵盖不同的视角。本研究强调了基层联络诊所的潜在益处和弊端,这些益处和弊端尚未在文献中进行衡量或探讨,因此可能有助于医疗保健管理者考虑这些益处和弊端。本研究的结果将为包括基层联络诊所卫生经济学计算器在内的评估框架提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
'The big value of it is getting the patient seen by the right person at the right time': clinician perceptions of the value of allied health primary contact models of care.

Allied health primary contact clinic models of care have increasingly been used as a strategy to increase public health service capacity. A recent systematic review found little consistency or agreement on how primary contact clinics are evaluated. The concept of value of primary contact clinics, which has important implications for evaluation, has not yet been explored in-depth. To explore allied health clinicians' perceptions of the value of allied health primary contact clinics, with the goal of informing an evaluation framework, a descriptive qualitative approach utilizing semi-structured interviews was employed. Participants included allied health staff embedded in clinical lead roles within primary contact clinics across four acute care hospitals in a metropolitan health service located in South-East Queensland, Australia. Lead staff from 30 identified primary contact clinic models in the health service were approached to take part via email. All eligible participants who provided consent were included. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used. A total of 23 clinicians (n = 23) representing 22 diverse models of primary contact clinics participated. Most participants were physiotherapists, dietitians, or occupational therapists, although speech pathology, audiology, and podiatry were also represented. Participant perceptions of the 'value' of PCCs were a highly complex phenomenon, comprising five intersecting domains: (i) patient satisfaction; (ii) clinical outcomes; (iii) care pathway and resource use; (iv) health service performance; and (v) staff satisfaction and professional standing. These five core value domains were positively or negatively influenced by 12 perceived benefits and 8 perceived drawbacks, respectively. Value domains were also highly interrelated and impacted upon each other. The concept of 'value' relating to primary contact clinics involves multiple intersecting domains encompassing different perspectives. This study highlighted potential benefits and drawbacks of primary contact clinics that have not yet been measured or explored in the literature, and as such may be useful for healthcare administrators to consider. The findings of this study will inform an evaluation framework including health economics calculator for primary contact clinics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
3.80%
发文量
87
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal for Quality in Health Care makes activities and research related to quality and safety in health care available to a worldwide readership. The Journal publishes papers in all disciplines related to the quality and safety of health care, including health services research, health care evaluation, technology assessment, health economics, utilization review, cost containment, and nursing care research, as well as clinical research related to quality of care. This peer-reviewed journal is truly interdisciplinary and includes contributions from representatives of all health professions such as doctors, nurses, quality assurance professionals, managers, politicians, social workers, and therapists, as well as researchers from health-related backgrounds.
期刊最新文献
Diagnostic performance of a newly launched Canadian fast-track ultrasound clinic by rheumatologists for the diagnosis of giant cell arteritis. Exploring the Development of Safety Culture among Physicians with Text Mining of Patient Safety Reports: A Retrospective Study. Optimizing Neurosurgery Clinic Operations: A Comparative Study of Interventions in Finland's Public Healthcare System. Setting Standards in Residential Aged Care: Identifying Achievable Benchmarks of Care for Long-term Aged Care Services. The Influence Mechanism Analysis of Family Doctor Team Effectiveness: A Mixed-method Approach.
×
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