维多利亚州的虚拟急救:利益相关者对优势、劣势、障碍的看法以及扩大服务的推动者。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Australasian Emergency Care Pub Date : 2023-10-16 DOI:10.1016/j.auec.2023.10.001
Dai Pu , Peter Cameron , Wendy Chapman , Louise Greenstock , Lena Sanci , Michele L. Callisaya , Terry Haines
{"title":"维多利亚州的虚拟急救:利益相关者对优势、劣势、障碍的看法以及扩大服务的推动者。","authors":"Dai Pu ,&nbsp;Peter Cameron ,&nbsp;Wendy Chapman ,&nbsp;Louise Greenstock ,&nbsp;Lena Sanci ,&nbsp;Michele L. Callisaya ,&nbsp;Terry Haines","doi":"10.1016/j.auec.2023.10.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Virtual emergency services have been proposed as an alternative service model to conventional in-person emergency department attendance.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Twenty participants were interviewed: 10 emergency medicine physicians, 4 health care consumers, and 6 other health care professionals. Conventional content analysis was performed on the interview transcriptions to identify perceived strengths and weaknesses of the VED, and barriers and facilitators to scaling-up the VED.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>VEDs are perceived as a convenient approach to provide and receive emergency care while ensuring safety and quality of care, however some patients may still need to attend the ED in person for physical assessments. There is currently a lack of evidence, guidelines, and resources to support their implementation. Most of the potential and existing barriers and facilitators for scaling-up the VED were related to their effectiveness, reach and adoption. Broader public health contextual factors were viewed as barriers, while potential actions to address resources and costs could be facilitators.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>VEDs were viewed as a convenient service model to provide care, can not replace all in-person visits. Current policies and guidelines are insufficient for wider implementation. Most of the barriers and facilitators for its scaling-up were related to VED effectiveness and delivery.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55979,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Emergency Care","volume":"27 2","pages":"Pages 102-108"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2588994X23000726/pdfft?md5=a85023194abb64604a7e204cd40725f2&pid=1-s2.0-S2588994X23000726-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Virtual emergency care in Victoria: Stakeholder perspectives of strengths, weaknesses, and barriers and facilitators of service scale-up\",\"authors\":\"Dai Pu ,&nbsp;Peter Cameron ,&nbsp;Wendy Chapman ,&nbsp;Louise Greenstock ,&nbsp;Lena Sanci ,&nbsp;Michele L. Callisaya ,&nbsp;Terry Haines\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.auec.2023.10.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Virtual emergency services have been proposed as an alternative service model to conventional in-person emergency department attendance.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Twenty participants were interviewed: 10 emergency medicine physicians, 4 health care consumers, and 6 other health care professionals. Conventional content analysis was performed on the interview transcriptions to identify perceived strengths and weaknesses of the VED, and barriers and facilitators to scaling-up the VED.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>VEDs are perceived as a convenient approach to provide and receive emergency care while ensuring safety and quality of care, however some patients may still need to attend the ED in person for physical assessments. There is currently a lack of evidence, guidelines, and resources to support their implementation. Most of the potential and existing barriers and facilitators for scaling-up the VED were related to their effectiveness, reach and adoption. Broader public health contextual factors were viewed as barriers, while potential actions to address resources and costs could be facilitators.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>VEDs were viewed as a convenient service model to provide care, can not replace all in-person visits. Current policies and guidelines are insufficient for wider implementation. Most of the barriers and facilitators for its scaling-up were related to VED effectiveness and delivery.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55979,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australasian Emergency Care\",\"volume\":\"27 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 102-108\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2588994X23000726/pdfft?md5=a85023194abb64604a7e204cd40725f2&pid=1-s2.0-S2588994X23000726-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australasian Emergency Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2588994X23000726\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"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":"Australasian Emergency Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2588994X23000726","RegionNum":4,"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:虚拟急诊服务已被提议作为传统的面对面急诊科就诊的替代服务模式。方法:20名参与者接受了访谈:10名急诊医生、4名医疗保健消费者和6名其他医疗保健专业人员。对访谈记录进行了传统的内容分析,以确定VED的优势和劣势,以及扩大VED的障碍和促进因素。结果:VED被认为是提供和接受紧急护理的方便方法,同时确保护理的安全和质量,然而,一些患者可能仍然需要亲自去急诊室进行身体评估。目前缺乏支持其实施的证据、指导方针和资源。扩大VED的大多数潜在和现有障碍和促进者与它们的有效性、覆盖范围和采用有关。更广泛的公共卫生背景因素被视为障碍,而解决资源和成本问题的潜在行动可能是促进因素。结论:VED被视为一种提供护理的便捷服务模式,不能取代所有的亲自就诊。目前的政策和指导方针不足以更广泛地执行。扩大其规模的大多数障碍和促进者都与VED的有效性和交付有关。
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
Virtual emergency care in Victoria: Stakeholder perspectives of strengths, weaknesses, and barriers and facilitators of service scale-up

Background

Virtual emergency services have been proposed as an alternative service model to conventional in-person emergency department attendance.

Methods

Twenty participants were interviewed: 10 emergency medicine physicians, 4 health care consumers, and 6 other health care professionals. Conventional content analysis was performed on the interview transcriptions to identify perceived strengths and weaknesses of the VED, and barriers and facilitators to scaling-up the VED.

Results

VEDs are perceived as a convenient approach to provide and receive emergency care while ensuring safety and quality of care, however some patients may still need to attend the ED in person for physical assessments. There is currently a lack of evidence, guidelines, and resources to support their implementation. Most of the potential and existing barriers and facilitators for scaling-up the VED were related to their effectiveness, reach and adoption. Broader public health contextual factors were viewed as barriers, while potential actions to address resources and costs could be facilitators.

Conclusions

VEDs were viewed as a convenient service model to provide care, can not replace all in-person visits. Current policies and guidelines are insufficient for wider implementation. Most of the barriers and facilitators for its scaling-up were related to VED effectiveness and delivery.

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
Australasian Emergency Care
Australasian Emergency Care Nursing-Emergency Nursing
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
82
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: Australasian Emergency Care is an international peer-reviewed journal dedicated to supporting emergency nurses, physicians, paramedics and other professionals in advancing the science and practice of emergency care, wherever it is delivered. As the official journal of the College of Emergency Nursing Australasia (CENA), Australasian Emergency Care is a conduit for clinical, applied, and theoretical research and knowledge that advances the science and practice of emergency care in original, innovative and challenging ways. The journal serves as a leading voice for the emergency care community, reflecting its inter-professional diversity, and the importance of collaboration and shared decision-making to achieve quality patient outcomes. It is strongly focussed on advancing the patient experience and quality of care across the emergency care continuum, spanning the pre-hospital, hospital and post-hospital settings within Australasia and beyond.
期刊最新文献
Maintenance of normothermia in the out-of-hospital setting: A pilot comparative crossover study of a foil blanket versus self-warming blanket. First Nations women's experiences of out-of-hospital childbirth: Insights for enhancing paramedic practice - A scoping review. The experiences of trans (binary and non-binary) people accessing emergency department care in Australia: A grounded theory study. Gender bias in text-to-image generative artificial intelligence depiction of Australian paramedics and first responders. The Clinical Frailty Scale offers little utility as part of a prediction model for community-dwelling older fallers at risk of re-presenting to the emergency department.
×
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