从患者角度看持续护理的重要性--瑞典医疗保健横断面研究。

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Ebba Cohen, Ida Lindman
{"title":"从患者角度看持续护理的重要性--瑞典医疗保健横断面研究。","authors":"Ebba Cohen, Ida Lindman","doi":"10.1080/02813432.2023.2299119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the patients' view on continuity of care (CoC), including preference for a certain general practitioner (GP) and importance and access to a regular general practitioner (RGP).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Primary care center in Halland County, in the western part of Sweden.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Patients ≥18 years old and having at least one appointment at the primary care center during October-December 2022.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Preference for a certain GP and importance of and accessibility for an RGP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 404 patients. Importance of having an RGP was considered by 86% of the patients. Preference for a certain GP was thought by 73% of the patients, and when asked as a bivariate question, 69% considered having an RGP. Both the importance of an RGP and preference for a certain GP were more often considered by patients ≥65 years (<i>p</i> < .0001). Regarding accessibility, 67% of the patients reported having access to their RGP 'always/most of the time or a lot of the time' and 62% reported seeing their RGP at last visit.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In conclusion, this study showed that the majority of patients value CoC in terms of importance of having an RGP. Older patients were more likely to have a preference for a certain GP. Two-third of the patients succeeded in seeing their RGP always or a lot of the time. The results in this study provide evidence that CoC is important for most patients, regardless of age and gender.Key pointsPrevious studies have showed that continuity of care (CoC) is important regarding mortality and morbidity. In primary care, there is a current debate regarding CoC, accessibility and the strive for CoC. This study showed that the majority of patients, regardless of age and gender, value CoC and consider it being important. However, there was a statistically significant difference regarding age, where patients above 65 years old thought it was more important to have a regular general practitioner and more often had a preference for a certain GP.</p>","PeriodicalId":21521,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care","volume":" ","pages":"195-200"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10851828/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Importance of continuity of care from a patient perspective - a cross-sectional study in Swedish health care.\",\"authors\":\"Ebba Cohen, Ida Lindman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02813432.2023.2299119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the patients' view on continuity of care (CoC), including preference for a certain general practitioner (GP) and importance and access to a regular general practitioner (RGP).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Primary care center in Halland County, in the western part of Sweden.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Patients ≥18 years old and having at least one appointment at the primary care center during October-December 2022.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Preference for a certain GP and importance of and accessibility for an RGP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 404 patients. Importance of having an RGP was considered by 86% of the patients. Preference for a certain GP was thought by 73% of the patients, and when asked as a bivariate question, 69% considered having an RGP. Both the importance of an RGP and preference for a certain GP were more often considered by patients ≥65 years (<i>p</i> < .0001). Regarding accessibility, 67% of the patients reported having access to their RGP 'always/most of the time or a lot of the time' and 62% reported seeing their RGP at last visit.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In conclusion, this study showed that the majority of patients value CoC in terms of importance of having an RGP. Older patients were more likely to have a preference for a certain GP. Two-third of the patients succeeded in seeing their RGP always or a lot of the time. The results in this study provide evidence that CoC is important for most patients, regardless of age and gender.Key pointsPrevious studies have showed that continuity of care (CoC) is important regarding mortality and morbidity. In primary care, there is a current debate regarding CoC, accessibility and the strive for CoC. This study showed that the majority of patients, regardless of age and gender, value CoC and consider it being important. However, there was a statistically significant difference regarding age, where patients above 65 years old thought it was more important to have a regular general practitioner and more often had a preference for a certain GP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21521,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"195-200\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10851828/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2023.2299119\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2023.2299119","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的本研究的主要目的是评估患者对连续性护理(CoC)的看法,包括对某位全科医生(GP)的偏好以及获得固定全科医生(RGP)服务的重要性和途径:设计:横断面研究:地点:瑞典西部哈兰德县的初级医疗中心:主要结果指标:对某位全科医生的偏好以及对全科医生的重视程度:主要结果指标:对某一全科医生的偏好,RGP的重要性和可及性:研究包括404名患者。86%的患者认为配戴角膜塑形镜很重要。73%的患者倾向于选择某位全科医生,当被问及双变量问题时,69%的患者认为需要配一副角膜塑形镜。年龄≥65 岁的患者更常考虑 RGP 的重要性和对某位全科医生的偏好(p 结论:RGP 的重要性和对某位全科医生的偏好在年龄≥65 岁的患者中更为普遍:总之,这项研究表明,大多数患者都从拥有 RGP 的重要性角度来看待 CoC。老年患者更倾向于选择某个 GP。有三分之二的患者总是或经常能见到他们的全科医生。这项研究的结果证明,无论年龄和性别如何,持续护理对大多数患者都很重要。在初级医疗领域,目前存在着关于连续性、可及性和争取连续性的争论。这项研究表明,大多数患者,无论年龄和性别,都重视连续性护理,并认为它很重要。然而,在年龄方面存在着显著的统计学差异,65 岁以上的患者认为拥有一名固定的全科医生更为重要,并且更倾向于选择某位全科医生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Importance of continuity of care from a patient perspective - a cross-sectional study in Swedish health care.

Objective: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the patients' view on continuity of care (CoC), including preference for a certain general practitioner (GP) and importance and access to a regular general practitioner (RGP).

Design: Cross-sectional study.

Setting: Primary care center in Halland County, in the western part of Sweden.

Subjects: Patients ≥18 years old and having at least one appointment at the primary care center during October-December 2022.

Main outcome measures: Preference for a certain GP and importance of and accessibility for an RGP.

Results: The study included 404 patients. Importance of having an RGP was considered by 86% of the patients. Preference for a certain GP was thought by 73% of the patients, and when asked as a bivariate question, 69% considered having an RGP. Both the importance of an RGP and preference for a certain GP were more often considered by patients ≥65 years (p < .0001). Regarding accessibility, 67% of the patients reported having access to their RGP 'always/most of the time or a lot of the time' and 62% reported seeing their RGP at last visit.

Conclusions: In conclusion, this study showed that the majority of patients value CoC in terms of importance of having an RGP. Older patients were more likely to have a preference for a certain GP. Two-third of the patients succeeded in seeing their RGP always or a lot of the time. The results in this study provide evidence that CoC is important for most patients, regardless of age and gender.Key pointsPrevious studies have showed that continuity of care (CoC) is important regarding mortality and morbidity. In primary care, there is a current debate regarding CoC, accessibility and the strive for CoC. This study showed that the majority of patients, regardless of age and gender, value CoC and consider it being important. However, there was a statistically significant difference regarding age, where patients above 65 years old thought it was more important to have a regular general practitioner and more often had a preference for a certain GP.

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
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
19.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care is an international online open access journal publishing articles with relevance to general practice and primary health care. Focusing on the continuous professional development in family medicine the journal addresses clinical, epidemiological and humanistic topics in relation to the daily clinical practice. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care is owned by the members of the National Colleges of General Practice in the five Nordic countries through the Nordic Federation of General Practice (NFGP). The journal includes original research on topics related to general practice and family medicine, and publishes both quantitative and qualitative original research, editorials, discussion and analysis papers and reviews to facilitate continuing professional development in family medicine. The journal''s topics range broadly and include: • Clinical family medicine • Epidemiological research • Qualitative research • Health services research.
×
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