[ICT in the evaluation of the quality of medical care].

Salvador González-Rodríguez, Rodolfo Rivas-Ruiz, Carmen Josephine Espinosa-Rafful, Mónica Alejandra Montano-López, Alfredo Robles-Rodríguez, Rosana Pelayo-Camacho, Laura Cecilia Bonifaz-Alfonzo, Luisa Alejandra Guadalupe Obrador-Garrido Cuesta
{"title":"[ICT in the evaluation of the quality of medical care].","authors":"Salvador González-Rodríguez, Rodolfo Rivas-Ruiz, Carmen Josephine Espinosa-Rafful, Mónica Alejandra Montano-López, Alfredo Robles-Rodríguez, Rosana Pelayo-Camacho, Laura Cecilia Bonifaz-Alfonzo, Luisa Alejandra Guadalupe Obrador-Garrido Cuesta","doi":"10.5281/zenodo.14901762","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Virtual Verification Application (VVA) was developed as an information and communication technology with the potential to support the formative aspect of evaluation, reduce costs, improve productivity, and provide results and feedback immediately.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the performance of the VVA in an experimental and controlled environment in the evaluation of processes and medical programs.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A process study was conducted comparing the VVA in four controlled clinical environments: Outpatient Consultation, Emergency, Operating Room, and Hospitalization, within the Simulation Center, modifying the conditions of each scenario. Additionally, the results of virtual (VV) and in-person (IP) evaluations conducted by both experts and novices in each environment and scenario were compared. The Bland-Altman method was used, and median differences were evaluated. The costs of both evaluations were also compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistically significant differences were found between scenarios (p = 0.795) or by experience (p = 0.819). In the Outpatient Consultation scenario, the difference was 0.58% (95% CI: -2.45, 1.29%); in Emergency, -0.9% (95% CI: -2.84, 1.04%); in the Operating Room, 0.19% (95% CI: -1.98, 2.36%); and in Hospitalization, there was no difference (0%, 95% CI: -7.37, 7.37%). The cost of the IP was 9.3 times higher than that of the VV.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The VVA and the IP evaluations have similar performance, with a significant reduction in costs. Therefore, it is a useful tool for evaluation and for improving the quality of medical care.</p>","PeriodicalId":94200,"journal":{"name":"Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social","volume":"63 2","pages":"e6209"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12048168/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14901762","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Virtual Verification Application (VVA) was developed as an information and communication technology with the potential to support the formative aspect of evaluation, reduce costs, improve productivity, and provide results and feedback immediately.

Objective: To determine the performance of the VVA in an experimental and controlled environment in the evaluation of processes and medical programs.

Materials and methods: A process study was conducted comparing the VVA in four controlled clinical environments: Outpatient Consultation, Emergency, Operating Room, and Hospitalization, within the Simulation Center, modifying the conditions of each scenario. Additionally, the results of virtual (VV) and in-person (IP) evaluations conducted by both experts and novices in each environment and scenario were compared. The Bland-Altman method was used, and median differences were evaluated. The costs of both evaluations were also compared.

Results: No statistically significant differences were found between scenarios (p = 0.795) or by experience (p = 0.819). In the Outpatient Consultation scenario, the difference was 0.58% (95% CI: -2.45, 1.29%); in Emergency, -0.9% (95% CI: -2.84, 1.04%); in the Operating Room, 0.19% (95% CI: -1.98, 2.36%); and in Hospitalization, there was no difference (0%, 95% CI: -7.37, 7.37%). The cost of the IP was 9.3 times higher than that of the VV.

Conclusions: The VVA and the IP evaluations have similar performance, with a significant reduction in costs. Therefore, it is a useful tool for evaluation and for improving the quality of medical care.

[信通技术在医疗保健质量评价中的应用]。
背景:虚拟验证应用程序(VVA)是作为一种信息和通信技术发展起来的,它具有支持评估的形成方面、降低成本、提高生产率和立即提供结果和反馈的潜力。目的:在实验和控制环境下,确定VVA在评估过程和医疗方案中的性能。材料与方法:对模拟中心内门诊、急诊、手术室和住院四种受控临床环境下的VVA进行了过程研究,并对每种场景的条件进行了修改。此外,还比较了专家和新手在每个环境和场景下进行的虚拟(VV)和现场(IP)评估的结果。采用Bland-Altman方法,评估中位数差异。还比较了两种评价的费用。结果:不同情景(p = 0.795)和不同经验(p = 0.819)之间无统计学差异。在门诊咨询情景中,差异为0.58% (95% CI: -2.45, 1.29%);急诊,-0.9% (95% CI: -2.84, 1.04%);在手术室,0.19% (95% CI: -1.98, 2.36%);住院治疗组无差异(0%,95% CI: -7.37, 7.37%)。IP的成本是VV的9.3倍。结论:VVA评价与IP评价效果相近,且成本显著降低。因此,它是评估和提高医疗质量的有用工具。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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