德国公众对急诊室可及性和质量的看法

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Western Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.5811/westjem.18224
J. Klein, Sarah Koens, Martin Scherer, A. Strauß, M. Härter, Olaf von dem Knesebeck
{"title":"德国公众对急诊室可及性和质量的看法","authors":"J. Klein, Sarah Koens, Martin Scherer, A. Strauß, M. Härter, Olaf von dem Knesebeck","doi":"10.5811/westjem.18224","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background It is well established that emergency department (ED) crowding leads to worse health outcomes. Although various patient surveys provide information about reasons to visit EDs, less is known in terms of beliefs about EDs among the general population. This study examines public beliefs regarding accessibility and quality of EDs and their associations with social characteristics (gender, age, education, immigration background) as well as knowledge about emergency care services and health literacy. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study based on a random sample of 2,404 adults living in Hamburg, Germany, in winter 2021/2022. We developed eight statements regarding accessibility and quality of EDs leading to two scales (Cronbach’s α accessibility = 0.76 and quality of care = 0.75). Descriptive statistics of the eight items are shown and linear regression were conducted to determine associations of the two scales with social characteristics as well as knowledge about emergency care services and health literacy (HLS-EU-Q6). Results Nearly 44% of the respondents agreed that “you can always go to an ED, if you do not get a short-term appointment with a general practitioner or specialist.” And 38% agreed with the statement, “If you do not have the time during normal practice hours due to your work, you can always go to an ED.” In terms of quality, 38% believed that doctors in EDs are more competent than doctors in general practice, and 25% believed that doctors in EDs are more competent than doctors in specialized practices. In the fully adjusted model, public beliefs about emergency care accessibility and quality of EDs were significantly associated with all social characteristics and knowledge of emergency care options with the strongest associations between knowledge and accessibility (β = −0.17; P < 0.001) and between education and quality (β = −0.23; P < 0.001). Conclusion We found endorsement of public beliefs about accessibility and quality of EDs that can lead to inappropriate utilization. Our results also suggest that knowledge of different emergency services plays an important role. Therefore, after system-related reorganizations of emergency care, information campaigns about such services tailored to socially deprived populations may help alleviate the issue of crowding.","PeriodicalId":23682,"journal":{"name":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Public Beliefs About Accessibility and Quality of Emergency Departments in Germany\",\"authors\":\"J. Klein, Sarah Koens, Martin Scherer, A. Strauß, M. Härter, Olaf von dem Knesebeck\",\"doi\":\"10.5811/westjem.18224\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background It is well established that emergency department (ED) crowding leads to worse health outcomes. Although various patient surveys provide information about reasons to visit EDs, less is known in terms of beliefs about EDs among the general population. This study examines public beliefs regarding accessibility and quality of EDs and their associations with social characteristics (gender, age, education, immigration background) as well as knowledge about emergency care services and health literacy. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study based on a random sample of 2,404 adults living in Hamburg, Germany, in winter 2021/2022. We developed eight statements regarding accessibility and quality of EDs leading to two scales (Cronbach’s α accessibility = 0.76 and quality of care = 0.75). Descriptive statistics of the eight items are shown and linear regression were conducted to determine associations of the two scales with social characteristics as well as knowledge about emergency care services and health literacy (HLS-EU-Q6). Results Nearly 44% of the respondents agreed that “you can always go to an ED, if you do not get a short-term appointment with a general practitioner or specialist.” And 38% agreed with the statement, “If you do not have the time during normal practice hours due to your work, you can always go to an ED.” In terms of quality, 38% believed that doctors in EDs are more competent than doctors in general practice, and 25% believed that doctors in EDs are more competent than doctors in specialized practices. In the fully adjusted model, public beliefs about emergency care accessibility and quality of EDs were significantly associated with all social characteristics and knowledge of emergency care options with the strongest associations between knowledge and accessibility (β = −0.17; P < 0.001) and between education and quality (β = −0.23; P < 0.001). Conclusion We found endorsement of public beliefs about accessibility and quality of EDs that can lead to inappropriate utilization. Our results also suggest that knowledge of different emergency services plays an important role. Therefore, after system-related reorganizations of emergency care, information campaigns about such services tailored to socially deprived populations may help alleviate the issue of crowding.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23682,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.18224\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Western Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.18224","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 急诊科(ED)拥挤导致健康状况恶化已是公认的事实。尽管各种患者调查提供了有关去急诊科就诊原因的信息,但对普通人群对急诊科的看法却知之甚少。本研究探讨了公众对急诊室可及性和质量的看法,以及这些看法与社会特征(性别、年龄、教育程度、移民背景)、急诊服务知识和健康素养的关系。方法 我们在 2021/2022 年冬季对居住在德国汉堡的 2,404 名成年人进行了随机抽样的横断面研究。我们就急诊室的可及性和质量制定了八项陈述,形成了两个量表(Cronbach's α accessibility = 0.76,quality of care = 0.75)。表中列出了八个项目的描述性统计数字,并进行了线性回归,以确定两个量表与社会特征以及急诊服务知识和健康素养(HLS-EU-Q6)之间的关联。结果 近 44% 的受访者同意 "如果短期内没有预约到全科医生或专科医生,可以随时去急诊室"。38%的受访者同意这样的说法,"如果由于工作原因在正常执业时间内没有时间,可以随时去急诊室就诊"。在质量方面,38% 的人认为急诊室的医生比全科医生更有能力,25% 的人认为急诊室的医生比专科医生更有能力。在完全调整模型中,公众对急诊室可及性和急诊室质量的看法与所有社会特征和对急诊选择的了解有显著相关性,其中知识与可及性(β = -0.17;P < 0.001)和教育与质量(β = -0.23;P < 0.001)之间的相关性最强。结论 我们发现,公众对急诊室可及性和质量的认可可能会导致不当使用。我们的研究结果还表明,对不同急诊服务的了解起着重要作用。因此,在对急诊护理系统进行相关重组后,针对社会贫困人口开展有关此类服务的宣传活动可能有助于缓解拥挤问题。
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
Public Beliefs About Accessibility and Quality of Emergency Departments in Germany
Background It is well established that emergency department (ED) crowding leads to worse health outcomes. Although various patient surveys provide information about reasons to visit EDs, less is known in terms of beliefs about EDs among the general population. This study examines public beliefs regarding accessibility and quality of EDs and their associations with social characteristics (gender, age, education, immigration background) as well as knowledge about emergency care services and health literacy. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study based on a random sample of 2,404 adults living in Hamburg, Germany, in winter 2021/2022. We developed eight statements regarding accessibility and quality of EDs leading to two scales (Cronbach’s α accessibility = 0.76 and quality of care = 0.75). Descriptive statistics of the eight items are shown and linear regression were conducted to determine associations of the two scales with social characteristics as well as knowledge about emergency care services and health literacy (HLS-EU-Q6). Results Nearly 44% of the respondents agreed that “you can always go to an ED, if you do not get a short-term appointment with a general practitioner or specialist.” And 38% agreed with the statement, “If you do not have the time during normal practice hours due to your work, you can always go to an ED.” In terms of quality, 38% believed that doctors in EDs are more competent than doctors in general practice, and 25% believed that doctors in EDs are more competent than doctors in specialized practices. In the fully adjusted model, public beliefs about emergency care accessibility and quality of EDs were significantly associated with all social characteristics and knowledge of emergency care options with the strongest associations between knowledge and accessibility (β = −0.17; P < 0.001) and between education and quality (β = −0.23; P < 0.001). Conclusion We found endorsement of public beliefs about accessibility and quality of EDs that can lead to inappropriate utilization. Our results also suggest that knowledge of different emergency services plays an important role. Therefore, after system-related reorganizations of emergency care, information campaigns about such services tailored to socially deprived populations may help alleviate the issue of crowding.
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
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine
Western Journal of Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
125
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: WestJEM focuses on how the systems and delivery of emergency care affects health, health disparities, and health outcomes in communities and populations worldwide, including the impact of social conditions on the composition of patients seeking care in emergency departments.
期刊最新文献
Impact of Prehospital Ultrasound Training on Simulated Paramedic Clinical Decision-Making. Interfacility Patient Transfers During COVID-19 Pandemic: Mixed-Methods Study. Making A Difference: Launching a Multimodal, Resident-Run Social Emergency Medicine Program. Methadone Initiation in the Emergency Department for Opioid Use Disorder. Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Sepsis in Adult Patients Meeting Two or More Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Criteria.
×
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