Alexander Drost, Nadia Azib, Ali Azarpey, Philippe Dentino, Diego Tijerina, David Ring, Amin Razi
{"title":"护理利用及主观措施。","authors":"Alexander Drost, Nadia Azib, Ali Azarpey, Philippe Dentino, Diego Tijerina, David Ring, Amin Razi","doi":"10.1177/24705470251339281","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In musculoskeletal health and care, visits, tests and treatments are often optional. There is some evidence that levels of utilization can be associated with subjective aspects of the illness, mindsets (thoughts and feelings about sensations) and stressful circumstances in particular. In a cross-sectional study of people seeking musculoskeletal specialty care, we addressed two questions: 1) Is there a difference in planned care utilization based on statistical groupings of measures of the subjective aspects of the illness? And 2) Are there any factors specifically associated with scheduling a return visit?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One hundred thirty-five patients seeking musculoskeletal specialty care completed measures of subjective patient factors including unhelpful thoughts and feelings of distress regarding symptoms, personal health agency, social health, and trust and experience with the clinician. Plans for a return visit, an injection, an imaging test, or referral to a physical therapist were documented. Cluster analysis was utilized to identify statistical groupings of scores on measures of subjective personal factors. Bivariate and logistic regression analyses evaluated factors associated with planned care utilization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified four statistical groupings of subjective factors through Cluster analysis: Group 1 had low trust, agency, and social health; Group 2 had low social health and high distress; Group 3 had healthy mindset and circumstances; and Group 4 had the highest social health and relatively healthy levels of the other subjective measures. Furthermore, no difference observed between statistical groups of the subjective regarding planned care utilization. Multivariable analysis revealed an association between scheduling a return visit and lower extremity clinicians (RC = 0.3; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.5; P-value, 0.02) but not with statistical groupings of measures of personal factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The finding that statistical groupings of patient personal factors were not associated with planned utilization of visits, tests, or treatments is inconsistent with other evidence linking mindsets actual utilization. A better understanding of sources of variation in planned and actual utilization is needed to help limit unwarranted variation and enhance effective use of resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":52315,"journal":{"name":"Chronic Stress","volume":"9 ","pages":"24705470251339281"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12048752/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Care Utilization and Measures of the Subjective.\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Drost, Nadia Azib, Ali Azarpey, Philippe Dentino, Diego Tijerina, David Ring, Amin Razi\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/24705470251339281\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In musculoskeletal health and care, visits, tests and treatments are often optional. There is some evidence that levels of utilization can be associated with subjective aspects of the illness, mindsets (thoughts and feelings about sensations) and stressful circumstances in particular. In a cross-sectional study of people seeking musculoskeletal specialty care, we addressed two questions: 1) Is there a difference in planned care utilization based on statistical groupings of measures of the subjective aspects of the illness? And 2) Are there any factors specifically associated with scheduling a return visit?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One hundred thirty-five patients seeking musculoskeletal specialty care completed measures of subjective patient factors including unhelpful thoughts and feelings of distress regarding symptoms, personal health agency, social health, and trust and experience with the clinician. Plans for a return visit, an injection, an imaging test, or referral to a physical therapist were documented. Cluster analysis was utilized to identify statistical groupings of scores on measures of subjective personal factors. Bivariate and logistic regression analyses evaluated factors associated with planned care utilization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified four statistical groupings of subjective factors through Cluster analysis: Group 1 had low trust, agency, and social health; Group 2 had low social health and high distress; Group 3 had healthy mindset and circumstances; and Group 4 had the highest social health and relatively healthy levels of the other subjective measures. Furthermore, no difference observed between statistical groups of the subjective regarding planned care utilization. Multivariable analysis revealed an association between scheduling a return visit and lower extremity clinicians (RC = 0.3; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.5; P-value, 0.02) but not with statistical groupings of measures of personal factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The finding that statistical groupings of patient personal factors were not associated with planned utilization of visits, tests, or treatments is inconsistent with other evidence linking mindsets actual utilization. A better understanding of sources of variation in planned and actual utilization is needed to help limit unwarranted variation and enhance effective use of resources.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":52315,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chronic Stress\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"24705470251339281\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12048752/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chronic Stress\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/24705470251339281\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chronic Stress","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/24705470251339281","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:在肌肉骨骼健康和护理中,就诊、检查和治疗通常是可选的。有一些证据表明,利用程度可能与疾病的主观方面、心态(对感觉的想法和感受)以及特别是压力环境有关。在一项对寻求肌肉骨骼专科治疗的人的横断面研究中,我们解决了两个问题:1)基于疾病主观方面测量的统计分组,计划护理利用是否存在差异?2)是否有什么因素与安排回访特别相关?方法:135例寻求肌肉骨骼专科护理的患者完成了主观患者因素的测量,包括对症状的无益想法和痛苦感觉、个人健康机构、社会健康以及对临床医生的信任和经验。复诊、注射、影像学检查或转介给物理治疗师的计划都被记录下来。采用聚类分析确定主观个人因素测量得分的统计分组。双变量和逻辑回归分析评估了与计划护理利用相关的因素。结果:通过聚类分析,我们确定了四组主观因素:第一组信任、代理和社会健康水平较低;2组社会健康程度低,苦恼程度高;3组有健康的心态和环境;第4组的社会健康和其他主观指标的相对健康水平最高。此外,统计组之间对计划护理利用的主观观察没有差异。多变量分析显示,安排复诊与下肢临床医生之间存在关联(RC = 0.3;95% CI 0.05 ~ 0.5;p值,0.02),但与个人因素测量的统计分组无关。结论:患者个人因素的统计分组与计划访问、检查或治疗的利用无关,这一发现与其他与心态实际利用有关的证据不一致。需要更好地了解计划和实际利用中变化的来源,以帮助限制不必要的变化和提高资源的有效利用。
Background: In musculoskeletal health and care, visits, tests and treatments are often optional. There is some evidence that levels of utilization can be associated with subjective aspects of the illness, mindsets (thoughts and feelings about sensations) and stressful circumstances in particular. In a cross-sectional study of people seeking musculoskeletal specialty care, we addressed two questions: 1) Is there a difference in planned care utilization based on statistical groupings of measures of the subjective aspects of the illness? And 2) Are there any factors specifically associated with scheduling a return visit?
Methods: One hundred thirty-five patients seeking musculoskeletal specialty care completed measures of subjective patient factors including unhelpful thoughts and feelings of distress regarding symptoms, personal health agency, social health, and trust and experience with the clinician. Plans for a return visit, an injection, an imaging test, or referral to a physical therapist were documented. Cluster analysis was utilized to identify statistical groupings of scores on measures of subjective personal factors. Bivariate and logistic regression analyses evaluated factors associated with planned care utilization.
Results: We identified four statistical groupings of subjective factors through Cluster analysis: Group 1 had low trust, agency, and social health; Group 2 had low social health and high distress; Group 3 had healthy mindset and circumstances; and Group 4 had the highest social health and relatively healthy levels of the other subjective measures. Furthermore, no difference observed between statistical groups of the subjective regarding planned care utilization. Multivariable analysis revealed an association between scheduling a return visit and lower extremity clinicians (RC = 0.3; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.5; P-value, 0.02) but not with statistical groupings of measures of personal factors.
Conclusion: The finding that statistical groupings of patient personal factors were not associated with planned utilization of visits, tests, or treatments is inconsistent with other evidence linking mindsets actual utilization. A better understanding of sources of variation in planned and actual utilization is needed to help limit unwarranted variation and enhance effective use of resources.