支持农村和偏远医院的混合虚拟医疗服务的临床经验:一项定性研究。

IF 6.7 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Anna E Thompson, Emily Saurman, Shannon Nott, Andrew Wilson, Tim Shaw
{"title":"支持农村和偏远医院的混合虚拟医疗服务的临床经验:一项定性研究。","authors":"Anna E Thompson,&nbsp;Emily Saurman,&nbsp;Shannon Nott,&nbsp;Andrew Wilson,&nbsp;Tim Shaw","doi":"10.5694/mja2.52525","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To explore the experiences of clinicians delivering, facilitating, and potentially affected by a hybrid virtual medical model servicing rural and remote hospitals in western New South Wales.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design, setting, participants</h3>\n \n <p>Qualitative study using semi-structured focus groups and individual interviews, conducted between 7 April 2022 and 16 March 2023, with rural generalist doctors delivering the Virtual Rural Generalist Service (VRGS) within the Western NSW Local Health District, local site staff, and local general practitioner visiting medical officers (GP VMOs).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main outcome measures</h3>\n \n <p>Key themes in clinician experience of the model and recommendations for improved experience, based on qualitative content analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We interviewed 12 VRGS doctors, 25 site nursing staff and nine GP VMOs. Clinicians were overwhelmingly positive about the VRGS, seeing it as providing good quality care and being an innovative and translatable solution to rural workforce challenges. In-person site visits by VRGS doctors were highly valued, especially by local site staff, for team building, skill building and increasing VRGS doctors’ understanding of the local context. The VRGS model relies on nursing availability and skill, and creates additional workload for nurses. Nurses in isolated sites valued the clinical support provided by the VRGS. Overall, most GP VMOs valued the fatigue relief offered by the VRGS; however, some viewed the VRGS as diminishing local doctors’ autonomy and the viability of their positions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The hybrid VRGS model is widely accepted by clinicians as providing good quality care for patients and high job satisfaction for providers. The service supports the local health workforce and makes rural medical positions more attractive and sustainable. The in-person shift requirement is central to the model's effectiveness and acceptability. Further investment is needed to train and resource local nurses who play an integral role in providing virtual medical care.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":18214,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Australia","volume":"221 S11","pages":"S16-S21"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.5694/mja2.52525","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinician experiences of a hybrid virtual medical service supporting rural and remote hospitals: a qualitative study\",\"authors\":\"Anna E Thompson,&nbsp;Emily Saurman,&nbsp;Shannon Nott,&nbsp;Andrew Wilson,&nbsp;Tim Shaw\",\"doi\":\"10.5694/mja2.52525\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>To explore the experiences of clinicians delivering, facilitating, and potentially affected by a hybrid virtual medical model servicing rural and remote hospitals in western New South Wales.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Design, setting, participants</h3>\\n \\n <p>Qualitative study using semi-structured focus groups and individual interviews, conducted between 7 April 2022 and 16 March 2023, with rural generalist doctors delivering the Virtual Rural Generalist Service (VRGS) within the Western NSW Local Health District, local site staff, and local general practitioner visiting medical officers (GP VMOs).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Main outcome measures</h3>\\n \\n <p>Key themes in clinician experience of the model and recommendations for improved experience, based on qualitative content analysis.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>We interviewed 12 VRGS doctors, 25 site nursing staff and nine GP VMOs. Clinicians were overwhelmingly positive about the VRGS, seeing it as providing good quality care and being an innovative and translatable solution to rural workforce challenges. In-person site visits by VRGS doctors were highly valued, especially by local site staff, for team building, skill building and increasing VRGS doctors’ understanding of the local context. The VRGS model relies on nursing availability and skill, and creates additional workload for nurses. Nurses in isolated sites valued the clinical support provided by the VRGS. Overall, most GP VMOs valued the fatigue relief offered by the VRGS; however, some viewed the VRGS as diminishing local doctors’ autonomy and the viability of their positions.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The hybrid VRGS model is widely accepted by clinicians as providing good quality care for patients and high job satisfaction for providers. The service supports the local health workforce and makes rural medical positions more attractive and sustainable. The in-person shift requirement is central to the model's effectiveness and acceptability. Further investment is needed to train and resource local nurses who play an integral role in providing virtual medical care.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Journal of Australia\",\"volume\":\"221 S11\",\"pages\":\"S16-S21\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.5694/mja2.52525\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Journal of Australia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.5694/mja2.52525\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.5694/mja2.52525","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:探讨临床医生在为新南威尔士州西部农村和偏远医院服务的混合虚拟医疗模式中提供、促进和潜在影响的经验。设计、设置、参与者:在2022年4月7日至2023年3月16日期间,对在新南威尔士州西部地方卫生区内提供虚拟农村全科医生服务(VRGS)的农村全科医生、当地现场工作人员和当地全科医生访问医疗官员(GP VMOs)进行了采用半结构化焦点小组和个人访谈的定性研究。主要结果测量:基于定性内容分析的临床医生经验模型的关键主题和改进经验的建议。结果:对12名VRGS医生、25名现场护理人员和9名GP vmo进行了访谈。临床医生对VRGS非常积极,认为它提供了高质量的护理,是解决农村劳动力挑战的创新和可转化的解决方案。VRGS医生,特别是当地的现场工作人员,对团队建设、技能培养和增加VRGS医生对当地情况的了解非常重视。VRGS模式依赖于护士的可用性和技能,并给护士带来额外的工作量。偏远地区的护士非常重视VRGS提供的临床支持。总体而言,大多数GP vmo重视VRGS提供的疲劳缓解;然而,一些人认为VRGS削弱了当地医生的自主权和他们职位的可行性。结论:混合VRGS模式可为患者提供高质量的医疗服务,并可提高提供者的工作满意度,为临床医生所广泛接受。这项服务支持当地卫生工作人员,使农村医疗职位更具吸引力和可持续性。亲自轮班的要求是模型有效性和可接受性的核心。需要进一步投资培训在提供虚拟医疗服务方面发挥不可或缺作用的当地护士,并为她们提供资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinician experiences of a hybrid virtual medical service supporting rural and remote hospitals: a qualitative study

Objectives

To explore the experiences of clinicians delivering, facilitating, and potentially affected by a hybrid virtual medical model servicing rural and remote hospitals in western New South Wales.

Design, setting, participants

Qualitative study using semi-structured focus groups and individual interviews, conducted between 7 April 2022 and 16 March 2023, with rural generalist doctors delivering the Virtual Rural Generalist Service (VRGS) within the Western NSW Local Health District, local site staff, and local general practitioner visiting medical officers (GP VMOs).

Main outcome measures

Key themes in clinician experience of the model and recommendations for improved experience, based on qualitative content analysis.

Results

We interviewed 12 VRGS doctors, 25 site nursing staff and nine GP VMOs. Clinicians were overwhelmingly positive about the VRGS, seeing it as providing good quality care and being an innovative and translatable solution to rural workforce challenges. In-person site visits by VRGS doctors were highly valued, especially by local site staff, for team building, skill building and increasing VRGS doctors’ understanding of the local context. The VRGS model relies on nursing availability and skill, and creates additional workload for nurses. Nurses in isolated sites valued the clinical support provided by the VRGS. Overall, most GP VMOs valued the fatigue relief offered by the VRGS; however, some viewed the VRGS as diminishing local doctors’ autonomy and the viability of their positions.

Conclusions

The hybrid VRGS model is widely accepted by clinicians as providing good quality care for patients and high job satisfaction for providers. The service supports the local health workforce and makes rural medical positions more attractive and sustainable. The in-person shift requirement is central to the model's effectiveness and acceptability. Further investment is needed to train and resource local nurses who play an integral role in providing virtual medical care.

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
Medical Journal of Australia
Medical Journal of Australia 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
410
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) stands as Australia's foremost general medical journal, leading the dissemination of high-quality research and commentary to shape health policy and influence medical practices within the country. Under the leadership of Professor Virginia Barbour, the expert editorial team at MJA is dedicated to providing authors with a constructive and collaborative peer-review and publication process. Established in 1914, the MJA has evolved into a modern journal that upholds its founding values, maintaining a commitment to supporting the medical profession by delivering high-quality and pertinent information essential to medical practice.
×
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