{"title":"开发精神科门诊病人自动监测系统:提高质量的第一步。","authors":"E M Hunkeler, J R Westphal, M Williams","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate an automated system of quality monitoring for psychiatric outpatients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Large outpatient psychiatry clinic in Kaiser Permanente--Northern California.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Approximately 1500 new psychiatric patients and 20 clinicians.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>This system gave clinicians data on new patients from validated instruments before their intake interviews, measured outcomes for the depressed and panic-disordered patients, and monitored the clinic's case-mix.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Clinic case-mix: Axis II disorders (Personality Disorder Questionnaire--Revised); emotional, social and physical functioning (Health Status Questionnaire 2.0); Axis I symptoms (Symptom Checklist-90); depression and panic disorder (Health Outcomes Institute Modules). Clinician reaction to system (telephone interview).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study population was 62.4% female; 73.9% Caucasian; 70% employed; 15.9% had evidence of personality disorder; 63% reduced daily activities because of emotional problems; 18% had depression; 7% had panic disorder. Over 75% of clinicians used the data reports and found them helpful; criticism focused on questionnaire length, inadequate training, numerous false-positives, and insufficient administrative support.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An automated patient monitoring system can be implemented; clinician involvement needs to be significant; more research is needed to establish the usefulness of standardized data and outcomes management.</p>","PeriodicalId":79628,"journal":{"name":"HMO practice","volume":"9 4","pages":"162-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing a system for automated monitoring of psychiatric outpatients: a first step to improve quality.\",\"authors\":\"E M Hunkeler, J R Westphal, M Williams\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate an automated system of quality monitoring for psychiatric outpatients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Large outpatient psychiatry clinic in Kaiser Permanente--Northern California.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Approximately 1500 new psychiatric patients and 20 clinicians.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>This system gave clinicians data on new patients from validated instruments before their intake interviews, measured outcomes for the depressed and panic-disordered patients, and monitored the clinic's case-mix.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Clinic case-mix: Axis II disorders (Personality Disorder Questionnaire--Revised); emotional, social and physical functioning (Health Status Questionnaire 2.0); Axis I symptoms (Symptom Checklist-90); depression and panic disorder (Health Outcomes Institute Modules). Clinician reaction to system (telephone interview).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study population was 62.4% female; 73.9% Caucasian; 70% employed; 15.9% had evidence of personality disorder; 63% reduced daily activities because of emotional problems; 18% had depression; 7% had panic disorder. Over 75% of clinicians used the data reports and found them helpful; criticism focused on questionnaire length, inadequate training, numerous false-positives, and insufficient administrative support.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An automated patient monitoring system can be implemented; clinician involvement needs to be significant; more research is needed to establish the usefulness of standardized data and outcomes management.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79628,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HMO practice\",\"volume\":\"9 4\",\"pages\":\"162-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1995-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HMO practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HMO practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Developing a system for automated monitoring of psychiatric outpatients: a first step to improve quality.
Objective: To evaluate an automated system of quality monitoring for psychiatric outpatients.
Design: Cross-sectional study.
Setting: Large outpatient psychiatry clinic in Kaiser Permanente--Northern California.
Participants: Approximately 1500 new psychiatric patients and 20 clinicians.
Interventions: This system gave clinicians data on new patients from validated instruments before their intake interviews, measured outcomes for the depressed and panic-disordered patients, and monitored the clinic's case-mix.
Main outcome measures: Clinic case-mix: Axis II disorders (Personality Disorder Questionnaire--Revised); emotional, social and physical functioning (Health Status Questionnaire 2.0); Axis I symptoms (Symptom Checklist-90); depression and panic disorder (Health Outcomes Institute Modules). Clinician reaction to system (telephone interview).
Results: The study population was 62.4% female; 73.9% Caucasian; 70% employed; 15.9% had evidence of personality disorder; 63% reduced daily activities because of emotional problems; 18% had depression; 7% had panic disorder. Over 75% of clinicians used the data reports and found them helpful; criticism focused on questionnaire length, inadequate training, numerous false-positives, and insufficient administrative support.
Conclusion: An automated patient monitoring system can be implemented; clinician involvement needs to be significant; more research is needed to establish the usefulness of standardized data and outcomes management.