The Doctors, Their Patients, and the Symptom Checker App: Qualitative Interview Study With General Practitioners in Germany.

IF 2.6 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
JMIR Human Factors Pub Date : 2024-11-18 DOI:10.2196/57360
Christine Preiser, Natalia Radionova, Eylem Ög, Roland Koch, Malte Klemmt, Regina Müller, Robert Ranisch, Stefanie Joos, Monika A Rieger
{"title":"The Doctors, Their Patients, and the Symptom Checker App: Qualitative Interview Study With General Practitioners in Germany.","authors":"Christine Preiser, Natalia Radionova, Eylem Ög, Roland Koch, Malte Klemmt, Regina Müller, Robert Ranisch, Stefanie Joos, Monika A Rieger","doi":"10.2196/57360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Symptom checkers are designed for laypeople and promise to provide a preliminary diagnosis, a sense of urgency, and a suggested course of action.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We used the international symptom checker app (SCA) Ada App as an example to answer the following question: How do general practitioners (GPs) experience the SCA in relation to the macro, meso, and micro level of their daily work, and how does this interact with work-related psychosocial resources and demands?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted 8 semistructured interviews with GPs in Germany between December 2020 and February 2022. We analyzed the data using the integrative basic method, an interpretative-reconstructive method, to identify core themes and modes of thematization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Although most GPs in this study were open to digitization in health care and their practice, only one was familiar with the SCA. GPs considered the SCA as part of the \"unorganized stage\" of patients' searching about their conditions. Some preferred it to popular search engines. They considered it relevant to their work as soon as the SCA would influence patients' decisions to see a doctor. Some wanted to see the results of the SCA in advance in order to decide on the patient's next steps. GPs described the diagnostic process as guided by shared decision-making, with the GP taking the lead and the patient deciding. They saw diagnosis as an act of making sense of data, which the SCA would not be able to do, despite the huge amounts of data.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>GPs took a techno-pragmatic view of SCA. They operate in a health care system of increasing scarcity. They saw the SCA as a potential work-related resource if it helped them to reduce administrative tasks and unnecessary patient contacts. The SCA was seen as a potential work-related demand if it increased workload, for example, if it increased patients' anxiety, was too risk-averse, or made patients more insistent on their own opinions.</p>","PeriodicalId":36351,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Human Factors","volume":"11 ","pages":"e57360"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/57360","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Symptom checkers are designed for laypeople and promise to provide a preliminary diagnosis, a sense of urgency, and a suggested course of action.

Objective: We used the international symptom checker app (SCA) Ada App as an example to answer the following question: How do general practitioners (GPs) experience the SCA in relation to the macro, meso, and micro level of their daily work, and how does this interact with work-related psychosocial resources and demands?

Methods: We conducted 8 semistructured interviews with GPs in Germany between December 2020 and February 2022. We analyzed the data using the integrative basic method, an interpretative-reconstructive method, to identify core themes and modes of thematization.

Results: Although most GPs in this study were open to digitization in health care and their practice, only one was familiar with the SCA. GPs considered the SCA as part of the "unorganized stage" of patients' searching about their conditions. Some preferred it to popular search engines. They considered it relevant to their work as soon as the SCA would influence patients' decisions to see a doctor. Some wanted to see the results of the SCA in advance in order to decide on the patient's next steps. GPs described the diagnostic process as guided by shared decision-making, with the GP taking the lead and the patient deciding. They saw diagnosis as an act of making sense of data, which the SCA would not be able to do, despite the huge amounts of data.

Conclusions: GPs took a techno-pragmatic view of SCA. They operate in a health care system of increasing scarcity. They saw the SCA as a potential work-related resource if it helped them to reduce administrative tasks and unnecessary patient contacts. The SCA was seen as a potential work-related demand if it increased workload, for example, if it increased patients' anxiety, was too risk-averse, or made patients more insistent on their own opinions.

医生、患者和症状检查应用程序:德国全科医生定性访谈研究》。
背景:症状检查器是专为非专业人士设计的,可提供初步诊断、紧迫感和建议的行动方案:我们以国际症状检查应用程序(SCA)Ada App 为例,回答以下问题:全科医生(GPs)在日常工作的宏观、中观和微观层面是如何体验 SCA 的?我们在 2020 年 12 月至 2022 年 2 月期间对德国的全科医生进行了 8 次半结构式访谈。我们采用解释--建构的综合基本方法对数据进行了分析,以确定核心主题和主题化模式:尽管本研究中的大多数全科医生对医疗保健及其实践中的数字化持开放态度,但只有一名全科医生熟悉 SCA。全科医生认为,SCA 是患者搜索病情的 "无组织阶段 "的一部分。与流行的搜索引擎相比,有些人更喜欢它。他们认为,只要 SCA 会影响病人看病的决定,它就会与他们的工作相关。有些人希望提前看到 SCA 的结果,以便决定病人下一步的治疗方案。全科医生认为诊断过程是在共同决策的指导下进行的,全科医生起主导作用,病人做决定。他们认为诊断是一种数据意义上的行为,尽管数据量巨大,但 SCA 无法做到这一点:全科医生对爱生雅持技术实用主义观点。他们在一个日益稀缺的医疗保健系统中工作。如果 SCA 能够帮助他们减少行政工作和不必要的病人接触,他们就会将其视为一种潜在的工作相关资源。如果 SCA 增加了工作量,例如增加了病人的焦虑、过于规避风险或使病人更加坚持自己的意见,则被视为潜在的工作需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JMIR Human Factors
JMIR Human Factors Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
123
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信