记录病人互动:紧急医疗服务报告读者的期望和提供者的改进。

Q3 Medicine
Wisconsin Medical Journal Pub Date : 2022-12-01
Elizabeth L Angeli, Julia Jezykowski, Patrick Sinclair, Tom Grawey, James T Poltrock, Ben Weston
{"title":"记录病人互动:紧急医疗服务报告读者的期望和提供者的改进。","authors":"Elizabeth L Angeli,&nbsp;Julia Jezykowski,&nbsp;Patrick Sinclair,&nbsp;Tom Grawey,&nbsp;James T Poltrock,&nbsp;Ben Weston","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Patient care reports contain critical elements related to interventions rendered and medical decision-making. Yet, little consensus exists around reader expectations, leaving emergency medical services (EMS) providers unaware of critical content.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This 2-phase study aimed to answer the questions \"What do EMS providers know about report readers?\" and \"What do report readers expect from reports?\" through surveys and interviews. In doing so, this study gauged EMS providers' audience awareness of report readership and determined what readers expected from reports.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective survey was conducted with 57 EMS providers to gauge their level of audience awareness or how often they thought of specific report reader groups when writing reports. Interviews were conducted with 14 report readers following retrospective think-aloud protocol, where participants verbalized their questions, comments, and concerns about reports while reading.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surveys indicate participants lacked a full, accurate sense of audience awareness. When writing reports, they thought of audiences, such as patients, who do not regularly read reports, while reporting not thinking of actual report readers-such as billing specialists-often or at all. Interview analysis indicated that report readers looked for 21 elements in high-quality, effective report narratives.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These data formalize and reinforce what a high-quality narrative should include, with \"high-quality\" meaning the narrative allows readers to do their jobs without follow-up or an amendment needed to the report.</p>","PeriodicalId":38747,"journal":{"name":"Wisconsin Medical Journal","volume":"121 4","pages":"285-291"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Documenting Patient Interaction: Emergency Medical Services Report Reader Expectations and Improvements for Providers.\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth L Angeli,&nbsp;Julia Jezykowski,&nbsp;Patrick Sinclair,&nbsp;Tom Grawey,&nbsp;James T Poltrock,&nbsp;Ben Weston\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Patient care reports contain critical elements related to interventions rendered and medical decision-making. Yet, little consensus exists around reader expectations, leaving emergency medical services (EMS) providers unaware of critical content.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This 2-phase study aimed to answer the questions \\\"What do EMS providers know about report readers?\\\" and \\\"What do report readers expect from reports?\\\" through surveys and interviews. In doing so, this study gauged EMS providers' audience awareness of report readership and determined what readers expected from reports.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective survey was conducted with 57 EMS providers to gauge their level of audience awareness or how often they thought of specific report reader groups when writing reports. Interviews were conducted with 14 report readers following retrospective think-aloud protocol, where participants verbalized their questions, comments, and concerns about reports while reading.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surveys indicate participants lacked a full, accurate sense of audience awareness. When writing reports, they thought of audiences, such as patients, who do not regularly read reports, while reporting not thinking of actual report readers-such as billing specialists-often or at all. Interview analysis indicated that report readers looked for 21 elements in high-quality, effective report narratives.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These data formalize and reinforce what a high-quality narrative should include, with \\\"high-quality\\\" meaning the narrative allows readers to do their jobs without follow-up or an amendment needed to the report.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38747,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Wisconsin Medical Journal\",\"volume\":\"121 4\",\"pages\":\"285-291\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Wisconsin Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wisconsin Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

患者护理报告包含与干预措施和医疗决策相关的关键要素。然而,关于读者期望的共识很少,使得紧急医疗服务(EMS)提供者不知道关键内容。目的:本研究分为两个阶段,旨在通过问卷调查和访谈来回答“EMS供应商对报告读者了解多少?”和“报告读者对报告的期望是什么?”在此过程中,本研究测量了EMS供应商对报告读者的受众意识,并确定了读者对报告的期望。方法:对57家EMS供应商进行了前瞻性调查,以衡量他们的受众意识水平或他们在撰写报告时考虑特定报告读者群体的频率。对14名报告读者进行了采访,他们遵循回顾性的大声思考协议,参与者在阅读报告时用语言表达他们对报告的问题、评论和关注。结果:调查显示,参与者缺乏完整、准确的受众意识。在撰写报告时,他们考虑的是不经常阅读报告的受众(如患者),而在撰写报告时,他们通常或根本不会考虑实际的报告读者(如账单专家)。访谈分析表明,报告读者在高质量、有效的报告叙事中寻找21个要素。结论:这些数据形式化并强化了高质量的叙述应该包括的内容,“高质量”意味着叙述允许读者在不需要跟踪或修改报告的情况下完成他们的工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Documenting Patient Interaction: Emergency Medical Services Report Reader Expectations and Improvements for Providers.

Introduction: Patient care reports contain critical elements related to interventions rendered and medical decision-making. Yet, little consensus exists around reader expectations, leaving emergency medical services (EMS) providers unaware of critical content.

Objectives: This 2-phase study aimed to answer the questions "What do EMS providers know about report readers?" and "What do report readers expect from reports?" through surveys and interviews. In doing so, this study gauged EMS providers' audience awareness of report readership and determined what readers expected from reports.

Methods: A prospective survey was conducted with 57 EMS providers to gauge their level of audience awareness or how often they thought of specific report reader groups when writing reports. Interviews were conducted with 14 report readers following retrospective think-aloud protocol, where participants verbalized their questions, comments, and concerns about reports while reading.

Results: Surveys indicate participants lacked a full, accurate sense of audience awareness. When writing reports, they thought of audiences, such as patients, who do not regularly read reports, while reporting not thinking of actual report readers-such as billing specialists-often or at all. Interview analysis indicated that report readers looked for 21 elements in high-quality, effective report narratives.

Conclusions: These data formalize and reinforce what a high-quality narrative should include, with "high-quality" meaning the narrative allows readers to do their jobs without follow-up or an amendment needed to the report.

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
Wisconsin Medical Journal
Wisconsin Medical Journal Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: The Wisconsin Medical Society is the largest association of medical doctors in the state with more than 12,000 members dedicated to the best interests of their patients. With that in mind, wisconsinmedicalsociety.org offers patients a unique source for reliable, physician-reviewed medical information. The Wisconsin Medical Society has been a trusted source for health policy leadership since 1841.
×
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