International Journal for Quality in Health Care最新文献

{"title":"Process management program to prevent falls in hospitalized patients with neuropsychiatric disorders: a quality improvement program","authors":"Hua XU, Zhao-hong CHEN, Juan SHE, Yan-hong ZHANG","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae034","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Falls were among the most common adverse nursing events. The incidence of falls in patients with neuropsychiatric disorders was high, and the occurrence of falls not only caused physical and psychological harm to patients but also led to medical disputes. Therefore, interventions for falls prevention were essential, but evaluations of the intervention process were lacking. Methods: In this study, a process management program to prevent falls based on the “structure-process-outcome” quality evaluation model was designed and applied to the clinical practice of falls prevention in hospitalized patients with neuropsychiatric disorders. The process quality evaluation checklist to prevent falls was used to supervise the implementation effect of intervention measures to prevent falls, identify the problems in the intervention measures, and make continuous improvements, to reduce the incidence of falls in such hospitalized patients as the final index. Results: The incidence of inpatient falls decreased from 0.199‰ (0.199 per 1000 patient-days) to 0.101‰ (0.101 per 1000 patient-days) before and after the implementation of the process management program for 12 months, 24 months, and 36 months, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The probability of falls was reduced by 49% after 36 months of monitoring. Furthermore, the proportion of patients at high risk of falls exhibited a downward trend. Conclusion: This quality improvement program was feasible and effective at reducing falls in hospitalized patients with neuropsychiatric disorders. Therefore, attention should be given to monitoring process quality in the management of falls.","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"57 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140596110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A multi-phase, multi-centre development and validation of two maturity tools assessing the implementation of the FlaQuM co-creation roadmap","authors":"Fien Claessens, Charlotte Van der Auwera, Deborah Seys, Dirk De Ridder, Astrid Van Wilder, Kris Vanhaecht","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae035","url":null,"abstract":"Background: As part of the new Flanders Quality Model (FlaQuM) towards sustainable quality management systems, a co-creation roadmap with six primary drivers and 19 building blocks that guides healthcare organisations has been developed. Currently, no assessment tool is available to monitor hospitals’ quality management systems implementation according to this co-creation roadmap. Therefore, we aimed to measure the maturity of the implementation of the FlaQuM co-creation roadmap in hospitals. Methods: A three-phase approach in co-design with 19 hospitals started with defining the scope, followed by establishing content validity through a literature review, involvement of content experts (n=47), 20 focus groups with content experts (n=79) and a Delphi round with healthcare quality managers (n=19) to test the content validity index (CVI). Construct validity was assessed by confirmatory factor analyses and convergent validity by Spearman’s ρ correlation coefficients. Results: Based on 17 included existing maturity instruments and sub-components of content experts, two maturity tools were developed according to the implementation of the FlaQuM co-creation roadmap: 1) a maturity matrix with 52 sub-components and 2) a co-creation scan with 19 statements. The overall scale-CVI varied between 93.3% and 90.0% in terms of relevance and clarity, respectively. In a sample of 119 healthcare professionals, factor analyses revealed a 6-factor structure and 16 (84.2%) of the 19 hypothesis for testing convergent validity between both maturity tools were statistically significant. Conclusion: Measuring the implementation of the FlaQuM co-creation roadmap and monitoring its maturity over time should be feasible by using these comprehensive maturity tools in hospitals. Results of both tools should be able to describe the current state of hospitals’ implementation of the co-creation roadmap as basis for strategic improvement plans and next steps.","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"94 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140596319","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Assessing quality of critical care during an ongoing health emergency in a resource-limited setting: A novel approach to evaluate the quality of care in Lebanese public ICUs during the COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Karim AbouNader","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae028","url":null,"abstract":"Background Quality of care has been systematically monitored in hospitals in high-income countries to ensure adequate care. However, in low- and middle-income countries, quality indicators are not readily measured. The primary aim of this study was to assess to what extent it was feasible to monitor the quality of Intensive care in an ongoing health emergency, and the secondary aim was to assess a quality of care intervention (twinning project) focused on Intensive Care Unit (ICU) quality of care in public hospitals in Lebanon. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study nested within an intervention implemented by the World Health Organization (WHO) together with partners. To assess the quality of care throughout the project, a monitoring system framed in the Donabedian model and included structure, process, and outcome indicators was developed and implemented. Data collection consisted of a checklist performed by external healthcare workers (HCWs) as well as collection of data from all admitted patients performed by each unit. The association between the number of activities within the interventional project and ICU mortality was evaluated. Results . A total of 1 679 patients were admitted to five COVID-19 ICUs during the study period. The project was conducted fully across 4 out of 5 hospitals. In these hospitals, a significant reduction in ICU mortality was found (OR: 0.83, p<0.05, CI: 0.72–0.96). Conclusion We present a feasible way to assess quality of care in ICUs and how it can be used in assessing a quality improvement project during ongoing crises in resource-limited settings. By implementing a quality of care intervention in Lebanon’s public hospitals, we have shown that such initiatives might contribute to improvement of ICU care. The observed association between increased numbers of project activities and reduced ICU mortality underscores the potential of quality assurance interventions to improve outcomes for critically ill patients in resource-limited settings. Future research is needed to expand this model to be applicable in similar settings.","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"61 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140596115","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The impact of elective surgery postponement during COVID-19 on emergency bellwether procedures in a large tertiary centre in Singapore.","authors":"Sze Ling Chan, Alwin Yaoxian Zhang, Sean Shao Wei Lam, Vijaya Rao, Devendra Kanagalingam, Hiang Khoon Tan, Pierce Kah Hoe Chow, Sachin Mathur","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae022","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae022","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic drove many healthcare systems worldwide to postpone elective surgery to increase healthcare capacity, manpower, and reduce infection risk to staff. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of an elective surgery postponement policy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical volumes and patient outcomes for three emergency bellwether procedures. A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent any of the three emergency procedures [Caesarean section (CS), emergency laparotomy (EL), and open fracture (OF) fixation] between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2021 was conducted using clinical and surgical data from electronic medical records. The volumes and outcomes of each surgery were compared across four time periods: pre-COVID (January 2018-January 2020), elective postponement (February-May 2020), recovery (June-November 2020), and postrecovery (December 2020-December 2021) using Kruskal-Wallis test and segmented negative binomial regression. There was a total of 3886, 1396, and 299 EL, CS, and OF, respectively. There was no change in weekly volumes of CS and OF fixations across the four time periods. However, the volume of EL increased by 47% [95% confidence interval: 26-71%, P = 9.13 × 10-7) and 52% (95% confidence interval: 25-85%, P = 3.80 × 10-5) in the recovery and postrecovery period, respectively. Outcomes did not worsen throughout the four time periods for all three procedures and some actually improved for EL from elective postponement onwards. Elective surgery postponement in the early COVID-19 pandemic did not affect volumes of emergency CS and OF fixations but led to an increase in volume for EL after the postponement without any worsening of outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10958764/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140174483","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Making remote healthcare safer.","authors":"Trisha Greenhalgh, Rebecca Payne, Flora McCabe","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae023","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae023","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140184372","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How are we handling protein drugs in hospitals? A human factors and systems engineering approach to compare two hospitals and suggest a best practice.","authors":"Clàudia Sabaté-Martínez, Mattias Paulsson, Silvia González-Suárez, Ulla Elofsson, Anna Millqvist Fureby, Marie Wahlgren, Carmen López-Cabezas","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae020","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae020","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Biopharmaceuticals are complex biological molecules that require careful storage and handling to ensure medication integrity. In this study, a work system analysis of real-world protein drug (PD) handling was performed with the following goals: identify main barriers and facilitators for successful adherence to accepted recommendations in PD handling, analyse differences in two organizations, and define a Best Current Practice in the real-life handling of PDs based on the results of the work system analysis. Observational study was held in two university hospitals in Spain and Sweden. Based on the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model, the tools chosen were: the PETT scan, in order to indicate the presence of barriers or facilitators for the PETT components (People, Environment, Tools, Tasks); the Tasks and tools matrices to construct a checklist to record direct observations during the real-life handling of biopharmaceuticals, and the Journey map to depict the work process. Observations were performed between March and November 2022. Each episode of direct observation included a single protein drug in some point of the supply chain and considered all the elements in the work system. Based on the results of the work system analysis and the literature review, the authors propose a list of items which could be assumed as Best Current Practice for PDs handling in hospitals. There were a total of 34 observations involving 19 PDs. Regarding People involved in the work process, there was a diversity of professionals with different previous training and knowledge, leading to an information gap. With respect to Environment, some structural and organizational differences between hospitals lead to risks related to the time exposure of PDs to room temperature and mechanical stress. Some differences also existed in the Tools and Tasks involved in the process, being especially relevant to the lack of compatibility information of PDs with new technologies, such as pneumatic tube system, robotic reconstitution, or closed-system transfer devices. Finally, 15 suggestions for best current practice are proposed. Main barriers found for compliance with accepted recommendations were related to the information gap detected in professionals involved in the handling of protein drugs, unmonitored temperature, and the lack of compatibility information of protein drugs with some new technologies. By applying a Human Factors and Systems Engineering Approach, the comparison of two European hospitals has led to a suggested list of Best Current Practices in the handling of protein drugs in a hospital.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11002458/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140093946","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Co-design of an intervention to improve patient participation in discharge medication communication.","authors":"Georgia Tobiano, Sharon Latimer, Elizabeth Manias, Andrea P Marshall, Megan Rattray, Kim Jenkinson, Trudy Teasdale, Kellie Wren, Wendy Chaboyer","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae013","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae013","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patients can experience medication-related harm and hospital readmission because they do not understand or adhere to post-hospital medication instructions. Increasing patient medication literacy and, in turn, participation in medication conversations could be a solution. The purposes of this study were to co-design and test an intervention to enhance patient participation in hospital discharge medication communication. In terms of methods, co-design, a collaborative approach where stakeholders design solutions to problems, was used to develop a prototype medication communication intervention. First, our consumer and healthcare professional stakeholders generated intervention ideas. Next, inpatients, opinion leaders, and academic researchers collaborated to determine the most pertinent and feasible intervention ideas. Finally, the prototype intervention was shown to six intended end-users (i.e. hospital patients) who underwent usability interviews and completed the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability questionnaire. The final intervention comprised of a suite of three websites: (i) a medication search engine; (ii) resources to help patients manage their medications once home; and (iii) a question builder tool. The intervention has been tested with intended end-users and results of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability questionnaire have shown that the intervention is acceptable. Identified usability issues have been addressed. In conclusion, this co-designed intervention provides patients with trustworthy resources that can help them to understand medication information and ask medication-related questions, thus promoting medication literacy and patient participation. In turn, this intervention could enhance patients' medication self-efficacy and healthcare utilization. Using a co-design approach ensured authentic consumer and other stakeholder engagement, while allowing opinion leaders and researchers to ensure that a feasible intervention was developed.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10944286/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140140243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Increasing venous thromboembolism risk assessment through a whole hospital-based intervention: a pre-post service evaluation to demonstrate quality improvement.","authors":"Juliana Abboud, Niaz Shaikh, Musthafa Moosa, Martin Dempster, Pauline Adair","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae019","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae019","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a primary cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. VTE risk assessment is a crucial part of the VTE prevention guideline. However, VTE risk assessment was not consistently undertaken for admitted patients. The aim of this study was to identify whether a quality improvement project implemented to change documentation of VTE risk assessment for hospitalized patients impacted patient safety by decreasing the rate of VTE incidences. The study was set in a 600+ bed acute hospital that provides medical and surgical services for adult patients during the period October 2018-September 2020. The hospital adopted the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) 9th edition VTE prevention guidelines and followed the Modified Caprini risk assessment tool. Following the FOCUS-Plan-Do-Check-Act (FOCUS PDCA) improvement methodology, the improvement team implemented multicomponent interventions over a 3-month period, including conducting educational sessions, sharing VTE documentation compliance results, giving reminders during rounds, assigning a VTE liaison physician within each clinical specialty, and updating and communicating the hospital adopted VTE guidelines. A total of 17 612 patients were included, respectively, 8971 in pre-intervention and 8641 post-intervention period. Documentation of VTE risk assessment upon admission increased significantly in the post quality improvement intervention period (60% vs. 42%, relative increase of 30%, χ2 = 1.43, P < 0.001). The run chart trend analysis demonstrated significant improvement shift and improvement trend after quality improvement project implementation, and it was sustained for 15 months. There was no impact on patient safety with a slight not statistically significant decrease in the VTE incidences rate post intervention period (0.4% vs. 0.5%, relative decrease of 1%, χ2 = 0.82, P < 0.397). The quality improvement project intervention significantly increased the percentage of patients assessed for VTE risk in a hospital setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10928308/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140101539","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"'The big value of it is getting the patient seen by the right person at the right time': clinician perceptions of the value of allied health primary contact models of care.","authors":"Caitlin Brandenburg, Elizabeth C Ward, Maria Schwarz, Michelle Palmer, Carina Hartley, Joshua Byrnes, Anne Coccetti, Rachel Phillips, Laurelie R Wishart","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae021","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae021","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Allied health primary contact clinic models of care have increasingly been used as a strategy to increase public health service capacity. A recent systematic review found little consistency or agreement on how primary contact clinics are evaluated. The concept of value of primary contact clinics, which has important implications for evaluation, has not yet been explored in-depth. To explore allied health clinicians' perceptions of the value of allied health primary contact clinics, with the goal of informing an evaluation framework, a descriptive qualitative approach utilizing semi-structured interviews was employed. Participants included allied health staff embedded in clinical lead roles within primary contact clinics across four acute care hospitals in a metropolitan health service located in South-East Queensland, Australia. Lead staff from 30 identified primary contact clinic models in the health service were approached to take part via email. All eligible participants who provided consent were included. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used. A total of 23 clinicians (n = 23) representing 22 diverse models of primary contact clinics participated. Most participants were physiotherapists, dietitians, or occupational therapists, although speech pathology, audiology, and podiatry were also represented. Participant perceptions of the 'value' of PCCs were a highly complex phenomenon, comprising five intersecting domains: (i) patient satisfaction; (ii) clinical outcomes; (iii) care pathway and resource use; (iv) health service performance; and (v) staff satisfaction and professional standing. These five core value domains were positively or negatively influenced by 12 perceived benefits and 8 perceived drawbacks, respectively. Value domains were also highly interrelated and impacted upon each other. The concept of 'value' relating to primary contact clinics involves multiple intersecting domains encompassing different perspectives. This study highlighted potential benefits and drawbacks of primary contact clinics that have not yet been measured or explored in the literature, and as such may be useful for healthcare administrators to consider. The findings of this study will inform an evaluation framework including health economics calculator for primary contact clinics.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140039267","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Multiple case study of processes used by hospitals to select performance indicators: do they align with best practices?","authors":"Michael A Heenan, Glen E Randall, Jenna M Evans, Erin M Reid","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae011","DOIUrl":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae011","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Several health policy institutes recommend reducing the number of indicators monitored by hospitals to better focus on indicators most relevant to local contexts. To determine which indicators are the most appropriate to eliminate, one must understand how indicator selection processes are undertaken. This study classifies hospital indicator selection processes and analyzes how they align with practices outlined in the 5-P Indicator Selection Process Framework. This qualitative, multiple case study examined indicator selection processes used by four large acute care hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Data were collected through 13 semistructured interviews and document analysis. A thematic analysis compared processes to the 5-P Indicator Selection Process Framework. Two types of hospital indicator selection processes were identified. Hospitals deployed most elements found within the 5-P Indicator Selection Process Framework including setting clear aims, having governance structures, considering indicators required by health agencies, and categorizing indicators into strategic themes. Framework elements largely absent included: adopting evidence-based selection criteria; incorporating finance and human resources indicators; considering if indicators measure structures, processes, or outcomes; and engaging a broader set of end users in the selection process. Hospitals have difficulty in balancing how to monitor government-mandated indicators with indicators more relevant to local operations. Hospitals often do not involve frontline managers in indicator selection processes. Not engaging frontline managers in selecting indicators may risk hospitals only choosing government-mandated indicators that are not reflective of frontline operations or valued by those managers accountable for improving unit-level performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10915788/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140039266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}