对护理点技术的不断发展的看法:来自全国医疗保健专业人员调查的结果。

IF 2 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science Pub Date : 2025-09-09 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1017/cts.2025.10149
Trevor Vigeant, Reilly Riddell, Bernard Ofosuhene, Grace White, Matheus Montenario, Ziyue Wang, Taylor Orwig, Heaven Y Tatere, Bryan Buchholz, Denise Dunlap, David D McManus, Ayorkor Gaba, Nathaniel Hafer
{"title":"对护理点技术的不断发展的看法:来自全国医疗保健专业人员调查的结果。","authors":"Trevor Vigeant, Reilly Riddell, Bernard Ofosuhene, Grace White, Matheus Montenario, Ziyue Wang, Taylor Orwig, Heaven Y Tatere, Bryan Buchholz, Denise Dunlap, David D McManus, Ayorkor Gaba, Nathaniel Hafer","doi":"10.1017/cts.2025.10149","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objective: </strong>Point-of-care technologies (POCTs) have grown increasingly prevalent in clinical and at-home settings, offering various rapid diagnostic capabilities. This study presents findings from a nationwide survey conducted between November 2023 and January 2024, capturing clinician perceptions of POCTs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The survey was distributed via email to healthcare professionals through academic and industry listservs and through LinkedIn posts. A total of 159 responses were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Core priorities, including accuracy, ease of use, and availability, remain consistently valued over the years. However, several perceived benefits, including continuous patient monitoring, diagnostic certainty, and patient management exhibited significant declines in agreement compared to previous years. Despite this, clinician perceptions of POCTs' abilities to enhance patient-provider communication remained stable. Evolving concerns may reflect heightened expectations and greater scrutiny as these technologies become commonplace. Agreement that POCTs may undermine clinical expertise increases, while concerns related to reimbursement and usability decline. Pilot questions related to artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) indicated moderate openness to adopting AI-enhanced POCTs, particularly with tools offering novel clinical insights.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While POCTs continue to be an asset in clinical settings, the findings of this study suggest a shift in provider attitudes toward a more neutral standpoint. Limitations include a low response rate, self-selection, and missing demographic data from a subset of participants. Future surveys will further integrate AI/ML-related questions while prioritizing broader demographic and geographic reach.</p>","PeriodicalId":15529,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","volume":"9 1","pages":"e207"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12485566/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evolving perceptions of point-of-care-technologies: Results from a nationwide survey of healthcare professionals.\",\"authors\":\"Trevor Vigeant, Reilly Riddell, Bernard Ofosuhene, Grace White, Matheus Montenario, Ziyue Wang, Taylor Orwig, Heaven Y Tatere, Bryan Buchholz, Denise Dunlap, David D McManus, Ayorkor Gaba, Nathaniel Hafer\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/cts.2025.10149\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background/objective: </strong>Point-of-care technologies (POCTs) have grown increasingly prevalent in clinical and at-home settings, offering various rapid diagnostic capabilities. This study presents findings from a nationwide survey conducted between November 2023 and January 2024, capturing clinician perceptions of POCTs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The survey was distributed via email to healthcare professionals through academic and industry listservs and through LinkedIn posts. A total of 159 responses were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Core priorities, including accuracy, ease of use, and availability, remain consistently valued over the years. However, several perceived benefits, including continuous patient monitoring, diagnostic certainty, and patient management exhibited significant declines in agreement compared to previous years. Despite this, clinician perceptions of POCTs' abilities to enhance patient-provider communication remained stable. Evolving concerns may reflect heightened expectations and greater scrutiny as these technologies become commonplace. Agreement that POCTs may undermine clinical expertise increases, while concerns related to reimbursement and usability decline. Pilot questions related to artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) indicated moderate openness to adopting AI-enhanced POCTs, particularly with tools offering novel clinical insights.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While POCTs continue to be an asset in clinical settings, the findings of this study suggest a shift in provider attitudes toward a more neutral standpoint. Limitations include a low response rate, self-selection, and missing demographic data from a subset of participants. Future surveys will further integrate AI/ML-related questions while prioritizing broader demographic and geographic reach.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15529,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"e207\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12485566/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.10149\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Translational Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2025.10149","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景/目的:点护理技术(POCTs)在临床和家庭环境中越来越普遍,提供了各种快速诊断能力。本研究介绍了2023年11月至2024年1月期间进行的一项全国性调查的结果,该调查捕捉了临床医生对poct的看法。方法:通过学术和行业列表和LinkedIn帖子向医疗保健专业人员发送电子邮件。总共分析了159份回复。结果:核心优先级,包括准确性、易用性和可用性,多年来一直受到重视。然而,与前几年相比,包括连续患者监测、诊断确定性和患者管理在内的一些可感知的益处显示出显着的下降。尽管如此,临床医生对poct增强医患沟通能力的看法保持稳定。随着这些技术变得司空见惯,不断变化的担忧可能反映出更高的期望和更严格的审查。越来越多的人认为poct可能会破坏临床专业知识,而对报销和可用性的关注却在下降。与人工智能(AI)和机器学习(ML)相关的试点问题表明,人们对采用人工智能增强的poct持中等开放态度,特别是那些提供新颖临床见解的工具。结论:虽然poct在临床环境中仍然是一种资产,但本研究的结果表明,提供者的态度正在向更中立的立场转变。限制包括低回复率,自我选择,以及缺少来自参与者子集的人口统计数据。未来的调查将进一步整合人工智能/机器学习相关的问题,同时优先考虑更广泛的人口和地理覆盖范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evolving perceptions of point-of-care-technologies: Results from a nationwide survey of healthcare professionals.

Background/objective: Point-of-care technologies (POCTs) have grown increasingly prevalent in clinical and at-home settings, offering various rapid diagnostic capabilities. This study presents findings from a nationwide survey conducted between November 2023 and January 2024, capturing clinician perceptions of POCTs.

Methods: The survey was distributed via email to healthcare professionals through academic and industry listservs and through LinkedIn posts. A total of 159 responses were analyzed.

Results: Core priorities, including accuracy, ease of use, and availability, remain consistently valued over the years. However, several perceived benefits, including continuous patient monitoring, diagnostic certainty, and patient management exhibited significant declines in agreement compared to previous years. Despite this, clinician perceptions of POCTs' abilities to enhance patient-provider communication remained stable. Evolving concerns may reflect heightened expectations and greater scrutiny as these technologies become commonplace. Agreement that POCTs may undermine clinical expertise increases, while concerns related to reimbursement and usability decline. Pilot questions related to artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) indicated moderate openness to adopting AI-enhanced POCTs, particularly with tools offering novel clinical insights.

Conclusions: While POCTs continue to be an asset in clinical settings, the findings of this study suggest a shift in provider attitudes toward a more neutral standpoint. Limitations include a low response rate, self-selection, and missing demographic data from a subset of participants. Future surveys will further integrate AI/ML-related questions while prioritizing broader demographic and geographic reach.

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
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
26.90%
发文量
437
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
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