初级保健提供者通过主动电子咨询改善COPD结局和获得专科护理的经验。

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2023-01-25 DOI:10.15326/jcopdf.2022.0357
Laura J Spece, William G Weppner, Bryan J Weiner, Margaret Collins, Rosemary Adamson, Douglas B Berger, Karin M Nelson, Jennifer McDowell, Eric Epler, Paula G Carvalho, Deborah M Woo, Lucas M Donovan, Laura C Feemster, David H Au, David H Au, George Sayre
{"title":"初级保健提供者通过主动电子咨询改善COPD结局和获得专科护理的经验。","authors":"Laura J Spece,&nbsp;William G Weppner,&nbsp;Bryan J Weiner,&nbsp;Margaret Collins,&nbsp;Rosemary Adamson,&nbsp;Douglas B Berger,&nbsp;Karin M Nelson,&nbsp;Jennifer McDowell,&nbsp;Eric Epler,&nbsp;Paula G Carvalho,&nbsp;Deborah M Woo,&nbsp;Lucas M Donovan,&nbsp;Laura C Feemster,&nbsp;David H Au,&nbsp;David H Au,&nbsp;George Sayre","doi":"10.15326/jcopdf.2022.0357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Often patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) receive poor quality care with limited access to pulmonologists. We tested a novel intervention, INtegrating Care After Exacerbation of COPD (InCasE), that improved patient outcomes after hospitalization for COPD. InCasE used population-based identification of patients for proactive e-consultation by pulmonologists, and tailored recommendations with pre-populated orders timed to follow-up with primary care providers (PCPs). Although adoption by PCPs was high, we do not know how PCPs experienced the intervention.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Our objective was to assess PCPs' experience with proactive pulmonary e-consults after hospitalization for COPD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a convergent mixed methods study among study PCPs at 2 medical centers and 10 outpatient clinics. PCPs underwent semi-structured interviews and surveys. We performed descriptive analyses on quantitative data and inductive and deductive coding based on prespecified themes of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility for qualitative data.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>We conducted 10 interviews and 37 PCPs completed surveys. PCPs perceived InCasE to be acceptable and feasible. Facilitators included the proactive consult approach to patient identification and order entry. PCPs also noted the intervention was respectful and collegial. PCPs had concerns regarding appropriateness related to an unclear role in communicating recommendations to patients. PCPs also noted a potential decrease in autonomy if overused.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This evaluation indicates that a proactive e-consult intervention can be deployed to collaboratively manage the health of populations with COPD in a way that is acceptable, appropriate, and feasible for primary care. Lessons learned from this study suggest the intervention may be transferable to other settings and specialties.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9995235/pdf/JCOPDF-10-046.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Primary Care Provider Experience With Proactive E-Consults to Improve COPD Outcomes and Access to Specialty Care.\",\"authors\":\"Laura J Spece,&nbsp;William G Weppner,&nbsp;Bryan J Weiner,&nbsp;Margaret Collins,&nbsp;Rosemary Adamson,&nbsp;Douglas B Berger,&nbsp;Karin M Nelson,&nbsp;Jennifer McDowell,&nbsp;Eric Epler,&nbsp;Paula G Carvalho,&nbsp;Deborah M Woo,&nbsp;Lucas M Donovan,&nbsp;Laura C Feemster,&nbsp;David H Au,&nbsp;David H Au,&nbsp;George Sayre\",\"doi\":\"10.15326/jcopdf.2022.0357\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Often patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) receive poor quality care with limited access to pulmonologists. We tested a novel intervention, INtegrating Care After Exacerbation of COPD (InCasE), that improved patient outcomes after hospitalization for COPD. InCasE used population-based identification of patients for proactive e-consultation by pulmonologists, and tailored recommendations with pre-populated orders timed to follow-up with primary care providers (PCPs). Although adoption by PCPs was high, we do not know how PCPs experienced the intervention.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Our objective was to assess PCPs' experience with proactive pulmonary e-consults after hospitalization for COPD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a convergent mixed methods study among study PCPs at 2 medical centers and 10 outpatient clinics. PCPs underwent semi-structured interviews and surveys. We performed descriptive analyses on quantitative data and inductive and deductive coding based on prespecified themes of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility for qualitative data.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>We conducted 10 interviews and 37 PCPs completed surveys. PCPs perceived InCasE to be acceptable and feasible. Facilitators included the proactive consult approach to patient identification and order entry. PCPs also noted the intervention was respectful and collegial. PCPs had concerns regarding appropriateness related to an unclear role in communicating recommendations to patients. PCPs also noted a potential decrease in autonomy if overused.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This evaluation indicates that a proactive e-consult intervention can be deployed to collaboratively manage the health of populations with COPD in a way that is acceptable, appropriate, and feasible for primary care. Lessons learned from this study suggest the intervention may be transferable to other settings and specialties.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9995235/pdf/JCOPDF-10-046.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15326/jcopdf.2022.0357\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15326/jcopdf.2022.0357","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)患者通常接受质量差的护理,接触肺科医生的机会有限。我们测试了一种新的干预措施,即COPD加重后的综合护理(InCasE),该干预措施改善了COPD患者住院后的预后。InCasE使用基于人群的患者识别,由肺科医生进行主动的电子咨询,并根据与初级保健提供者(PCP)的随访时间安排的预先填充的订单定制建议。尽管PCP的采用率很高,但我们不知道PCP是如何经历干预的。目的:我们的目的是评估PCPs在COPD住院后主动进行肺部电子咨询的经验。方法:我们在2个医疗中心和10个门诊对研究PCP进行了收敛混合方法研究。PCP接受了半结构化访谈和调查。我们对定量数据进行了描述性分析,并根据定性数据的可接受性、适当性和可行性等预先指定的主题进行了归纳和演绎编码。主要结果:我们进行了10次访谈,37名PCP完成了调查。PCP认为InCasE是可接受和可行的。促进者包括患者识别和订单输入的主动咨询方法。PCP还指出,干预是尊重和合议的。PCP对适当性表示担忧,这与向患者传达建议的角色不明确有关。PCP还指出,如果过度使用,自主性可能会降低。结论:这项评估表明,可以采用积极的电子咨询干预措施,以一种可接受、适当和可行的方式,协同管理COPD患者的健康。从这项研究中吸取的经验教训表明,干预措施可能会转移到其他环境和专业。
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
Primary Care Provider Experience With Proactive E-Consults to Improve COPD Outcomes and Access to Specialty Care.

Background: Often patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) receive poor quality care with limited access to pulmonologists. We tested a novel intervention, INtegrating Care After Exacerbation of COPD (InCasE), that improved patient outcomes after hospitalization for COPD. InCasE used population-based identification of patients for proactive e-consultation by pulmonologists, and tailored recommendations with pre-populated orders timed to follow-up with primary care providers (PCPs). Although adoption by PCPs was high, we do not know how PCPs experienced the intervention.

Objective: Our objective was to assess PCPs' experience with proactive pulmonary e-consults after hospitalization for COPD.

Methods: We conducted a convergent mixed methods study among study PCPs at 2 medical centers and 10 outpatient clinics. PCPs underwent semi-structured interviews and surveys. We performed descriptive analyses on quantitative data and inductive and deductive coding based on prespecified themes of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility for qualitative data.

Key results: We conducted 10 interviews and 37 PCPs completed surveys. PCPs perceived InCasE to be acceptable and feasible. Facilitators included the proactive consult approach to patient identification and order entry. PCPs also noted the intervention was respectful and collegial. PCPs had concerns regarding appropriateness related to an unclear role in communicating recommendations to patients. PCPs also noted a potential decrease in autonomy if overused.

Conclusion: This evaluation indicates that a proactive e-consult intervention can be deployed to collaboratively manage the health of populations with COPD in a way that is acceptable, appropriate, and feasible for primary care. Lessons learned from this study suggest the intervention may be transferable to other settings and specialties.

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
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
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