电子会诊的使用模式:对一家学术医疗中心部署的两种模式的使用情况进行回顾性分析。

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare Pub Date : 2024-11-13 DOI:10.1177/1357633X241292119
Stephanie Grim, Devin Miller, Ellen Mooneyhan, Rodger Kessler, Anne Fuhlbrigge, John F Thomas
{"title":"电子会诊的使用模式:对一家学术医疗中心部署的两种模式的使用情况进行回顾性分析。","authors":"Stephanie Grim, Devin Miller, Ellen Mooneyhan, Rodger Kessler, Anne Fuhlbrigge, John F Thomas","doi":"10.1177/1357633X241292119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Electronic consultations (eConsults) have been implemented by numerous academic medical centers (AMCs) to improve communication and address access to specialty care. As these models proliferate, we must understand their comparative benefit and use in various settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective, descriptive analysis compares eConsult utilization trends at an AMC that has deployed an internal effort and an external pivot. Relevant metrics are presented using counts and proportions or median and range where appropriate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The internal AMC program demonstrated sustained growth from years 1 through 6, while the external pivot demonstrated considerable growth in year 1, followed by a steady decline in subsequent years. Endocrinology generated the highest number of eConsult orders in both programs (AMC 21%, external pivot 16%). Conversion rates to in-person visits were higher in the external pivot (22%) than in the internal AMC program (14%). Median response time across all specialties was faster (17 hours) for the AMC program than the external pivot (23 hours). The median number of eConsults ordered by any single primary care provider was 3 in both programs. The percentage of providers using the eConsult ordering system only once was approximately 30% in both programs. eConsults were primarily ordered by physicians (68%) at the AMC and physician assistants (40%) in the external pivot.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The current study highlights similarities and differences between internal and external eConsult programs that can inform future \"right-sizing\" of care according to patient needs while promoting local care delivery and improving efficiencies at the AMC.</p>","PeriodicalId":50024,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","volume":" ","pages":"1357633X241292119"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patterns of eConsult use: A retrospective analysis of usage comparing two models deployed at an academic medical center.\",\"authors\":\"Stephanie Grim, Devin Miller, Ellen Mooneyhan, Rodger Kessler, Anne Fuhlbrigge, John F Thomas\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1357633X241292119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Electronic consultations (eConsults) have been implemented by numerous academic medical centers (AMCs) to improve communication and address access to specialty care. As these models proliferate, we must understand their comparative benefit and use in various settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective, descriptive analysis compares eConsult utilization trends at an AMC that has deployed an internal effort and an external pivot. Relevant metrics are presented using counts and proportions or median and range where appropriate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The internal AMC program demonstrated sustained growth from years 1 through 6, while the external pivot demonstrated considerable growth in year 1, followed by a steady decline in subsequent years. Endocrinology generated the highest number of eConsult orders in both programs (AMC 21%, external pivot 16%). Conversion rates to in-person visits were higher in the external pivot (22%) than in the internal AMC program (14%). Median response time across all specialties was faster (17 hours) for the AMC program than the external pivot (23 hours). The median number of eConsults ordered by any single primary care provider was 3 in both programs. The percentage of providers using the eConsult ordering system only once was approximately 30% in both programs. eConsults were primarily ordered by physicians (68%) at the AMC and physician assistants (40%) in the external pivot.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The current study highlights similarities and differences between internal and external eConsult programs that can inform future \\\"right-sizing\\\" of care according to patient needs while promoting local care delivery and improving efficiencies at the AMC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1357633X241292119\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X241292119\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X241292119","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:许多学术医疗中心(AMC)已开始实施电子会诊(eConsults),以改善沟通并解决专科医疗的获取问题。随着这些模式的推广,我们必须了解它们在不同环境下的比较效益和使用情况:这项回顾性、描述性分析比较了已部署内部努力和外部枢轴的 AMC 的 eConsult 使用趋势。相关指标酌情使用计数和比例或中位数和范围来表示:结果:内部医疗中心项目从第 1 年到第 6 年一直保持持续增长,而外部枢轴项目在第 1 年出现大幅增长,随后几年则持续下降。在这两个项目中,内分泌科产生的电子会诊订单数量最多(AMC 21%,外部枢轴 16%)。外部枢轴(22%)与内部 AMC 计划(14%)相比,亲自到访的转化率更高。在所有专科中,AMC 计划的中位响应时间(17 小时)快于外部枢轴计划(23 小时)。在这两个项目中,单个初级医疗服务提供者订购的电子会诊次数中位数均为 3 次。在这两个项目中,只使用过一次电子会诊订购系统的医疗服务提供者约占 30%。在 AMC 项目中,电子会诊主要由医生(68%)订购,而在外部枢轴项目中,主要由医生助理(40%)订购:本研究强调了内部和外部电子会诊项目之间的异同,可为今后根据患者需求 "合理调整 "医疗服务提供参考,同时促进当地医疗服务的提供并提高医疗中心的效率。
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
Patterns of eConsult use: A retrospective analysis of usage comparing two models deployed at an academic medical center.

Introduction: Electronic consultations (eConsults) have been implemented by numerous academic medical centers (AMCs) to improve communication and address access to specialty care. As these models proliferate, we must understand their comparative benefit and use in various settings.

Methods: This retrospective, descriptive analysis compares eConsult utilization trends at an AMC that has deployed an internal effort and an external pivot. Relevant metrics are presented using counts and proportions or median and range where appropriate.

Results: The internal AMC program demonstrated sustained growth from years 1 through 6, while the external pivot demonstrated considerable growth in year 1, followed by a steady decline in subsequent years. Endocrinology generated the highest number of eConsult orders in both programs (AMC 21%, external pivot 16%). Conversion rates to in-person visits were higher in the external pivot (22%) than in the internal AMC program (14%). Median response time across all specialties was faster (17 hours) for the AMC program than the external pivot (23 hours). The median number of eConsults ordered by any single primary care provider was 3 in both programs. The percentage of providers using the eConsult ordering system only once was approximately 30% in both programs. eConsults were primarily ordered by physicians (68%) at the AMC and physician assistants (40%) in the external pivot.

Discussion: The current study highlights similarities and differences between internal and external eConsult programs that can inform future "right-sizing" of care according to patient needs while promoting local care delivery and improving efficiencies at the AMC.

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
14.10
自引率
10.60%
发文量
174
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare provides excellent peer reviewed coverage of developments in telemedicine and e-health and is now widely recognised as the leading journal in its field. Contributions from around the world provide a unique perspective on how different countries and health systems are using new technology in health care. Sections within the journal include technology updates, editorials, original articles, research tutorials, educational material, review articles and reports from various telemedicine organisations. A subscription to this journal will help you to stay up-to-date in this fast moving and growing area of medicine.
期刊最新文献
Satisfaction with videoconference-delivered CBT provided as part of a blended treatment approach for children and adolescents with mental disorders and their families during the COVID-19 pandemic: A follow-up survey among caregivers and therapists. Ear Portal: An urban-based ear, nose, and throat, and audiology referral telehealth portal to improve access to specialist ear health services for children. The Congenital Cardiology Cloud: Proof of feasibility of Germany's first tele-medical network for pediatric cardiology. Care trajectories for patients utilizing electronic visits for COVID-like symptoms in a large healthcare delivery system: May 2020-December 2021. Knowledge, perceptions, and readiness of telepharmacy (KPR-TP) questionnaire among pharmacists: Development and psychometric evaluation.
×
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