非医生引导的运动压力超声心动图减少了等待时间,提高了消费者的参与度。

Q3 Medicine
Critical Pathways in Cardiology Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-23 DOI:10.1097/HPC.0000000000000379
Mark Whitman, Carly Jenkins, Prasad Challa
{"title":"非医生引导的运动压力超声心动图减少了等待时间,提高了消费者的参与度。","authors":"Mark Whitman, Carly Jenkins, Prasad Challa","doi":"10.1097/HPC.0000000000000379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The performance of nonphysician-led exercise stress testing with and without echocardiography has shown similar diagnostic utility and safety as physician-led models. While diagnostic accuracy and relative safety have been the focus of previous research, the current study aims to demonstrate efficiencies not previously reported, such as reduction in wait times for testing and improved service attendance. A nonphysician-led exercise stress echocardiography service was implemented on January 01, 2018; before this, all tests were performed under a physician-led model. Retrospective data was retrieved from both models (physician-led model from January 01, 2015 to December 31, 2017 and the nonphysician-led model from January 01, 2018 to December 31, 2023). Comparisons were made between the models regarding the number of tests performed, the average wait time to access testing, and the did not attend (DNA) rates. On average, 212 tests were performed in the physician-led model per year, with average wait times to access testing of 11.3 weeks and a DNA rate of 15.3%. In contrast, the nonphysician-led model performed on average 501 tests per year (135% increase) ( P < 0.001) with average wait times of 6 weeks (47% decrease) ( P < 0.01) and DNA rate of 4.8% (69% decrease). Despite the physician-led group displaying an overall higher cardiovascular disease risk, there were no adverse cardiovascular events at the time of testing in either model. Nonphysician-led exercise stress echocardiography remains as safe as physician-led models but demonstrates service improvements, including significant reductions in wait times and lower DNA rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":35914,"journal":{"name":"Critical Pathways in Cardiology","volume":" ","pages":"e0379"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Access to Nonphysician Led Exercise Stress Echocardiography Reduces Wait Times and Improves Consumer Engagement.\",\"authors\":\"Mark Whitman, Carly Jenkins, Prasad Challa\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/HPC.0000000000000379\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The performance of nonphysician-led exercise stress testing with and without echocardiography has shown similar diagnostic utility and safety as physician-led models. While diagnostic accuracy and relative safety have been the focus of previous research, the current study aims to demonstrate efficiencies not previously reported, such as reduction in wait times for testing and improved service attendance. A nonphysician-led exercise stress echocardiography service was implemented on January 01, 2018; before this, all tests were performed under a physician-led model. Retrospective data was retrieved from both models (physician-led model from January 01, 2015 to December 31, 2017 and the nonphysician-led model from January 01, 2018 to December 31, 2023). Comparisons were made between the models regarding the number of tests performed, the average wait time to access testing, and the did not attend (DNA) rates. On average, 212 tests were performed in the physician-led model per year, with average wait times to access testing of 11.3 weeks and a DNA rate of 15.3%. In contrast, the nonphysician-led model performed on average 501 tests per year (135% increase) ( P < 0.001) with average wait times of 6 weeks (47% decrease) ( P < 0.01) and DNA rate of 4.8% (69% decrease). Despite the physician-led group displaying an overall higher cardiovascular disease risk, there were no adverse cardiovascular events at the time of testing in either model. Nonphysician-led exercise stress echocardiography remains as safe as physician-led models but demonstrates service improvements, including significant reductions in wait times and lower DNA rates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Pathways in Cardiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e0379\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Pathways in Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/HPC.0000000000000379\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Pathways in Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HPC.0000000000000379","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有和没有超声心动图的非医生领导的运动压力测试显示出与医生领导的模型相似的诊断效用和安全性。虽然诊断的准确性和相对安全性一直是先前研究的重点,但目前的研究旨在证明以前未报道的效率,例如减少等待检测的时间和提高服务出勤率。非医生主导的运动应激超声心动图(ESE)服务于2018年1月1日实施,在此之前,所有测试都是在医生主导的模式下进行的。从两个模型中检索回顾性数据(2015年1月1日至2017年12月31日由医生领导的模型和2018年1月1日至2023年12月31日由非医生领导的模型)。在模型之间进行了关于执行的测试次数、获得测试的平均等待时间和未参加(DNA)率的比较。在医生主导的模式下,每年平均进行212次检测,平均等待时间为11.3周,DNA率为15.3%。相比之下,非医生主导的模型平均每年进行501次测试(增加135%)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Access to Nonphysician Led Exercise Stress Echocardiography Reduces Wait Times and Improves Consumer Engagement.

The performance of nonphysician-led exercise stress testing with and without echocardiography has shown similar diagnostic utility and safety as physician-led models. While diagnostic accuracy and relative safety have been the focus of previous research, the current study aims to demonstrate efficiencies not previously reported, such as reduction in wait times for testing and improved service attendance. A nonphysician-led exercise stress echocardiography service was implemented on January 01, 2018; before this, all tests were performed under a physician-led model. Retrospective data was retrieved from both models (physician-led model from January 01, 2015 to December 31, 2017 and the nonphysician-led model from January 01, 2018 to December 31, 2023). Comparisons were made between the models regarding the number of tests performed, the average wait time to access testing, and the did not attend (DNA) rates. On average, 212 tests were performed in the physician-led model per year, with average wait times to access testing of 11.3 weeks and a DNA rate of 15.3%. In contrast, the nonphysician-led model performed on average 501 tests per year (135% increase) ( P < 0.001) with average wait times of 6 weeks (47% decrease) ( P < 0.01) and DNA rate of 4.8% (69% decrease). Despite the physician-led group displaying an overall higher cardiovascular disease risk, there were no adverse cardiovascular events at the time of testing in either model. Nonphysician-led exercise stress echocardiography remains as safe as physician-led models but demonstrates service improvements, including significant reductions in wait times and lower DNA rates.

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
Critical Pathways in Cardiology
Critical Pathways in Cardiology Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: Critical Pathways in Cardiology provides a single source for the diagnostic and therapeutic protocols in use at hospitals worldwide for patients with cardiac disorders. The Journal presents critical pathways for specific diagnoses—complete with evidence-based rationales—and also publishes studies of these protocols" effectiveness.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信