以患者为中心的护理技术配置:对美国医院患者参与系统、远程医疗和远程患者监测的探索性分析。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Jung Young Lee, C Christopher Lee, Jeong Hoon Choi
{"title":"以患者为中心的护理技术配置:对美国医院患者参与系统、远程医疗和远程患者监测的探索性分析。","authors":"Jung Young Lee, C Christopher Lee, Jeong Hoon Choi","doi":"10.1097/HMR.0000000000000491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the growing demand for patient-centered care (PCC), there is a limited understanding of how hospitals configure and coordinate patient-facing technologies, such as Patient Engagement Systems (PES), telehealth, and Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM), on a national scale.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study seeks to identify existing technology configurations in U.S. hospitals and analyze the association between these configurations and various hospital performance measures.</p><p><strong>Methodology/approach: </strong>Using cluster analysis on data from over 3,300 U.S. hospitals, we developed a taxonomy of three distinct technology configurations: Patient-Centric Pioneers, Selective Tech Adopters, and Traditional Care Providers. The differences in structural characteristics and performance measures among these groups are statistically analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Hospitals in the Patient-Centric Pioneers group, which fully implement and effectively integrate PES, telehealth, and RPM, consistently outperform the others in terms of efficiency, clinical quality, and patient satisfaction. Selective Tech Adopters displayed the highest manpower productivity. However, they did not achieve better patient satisfaction than Traditional Care Providers with limited technologies.</p><p><strong>Practice implications: </strong>Our research presents a comprehensive, robust empirical taxonomy of PCC technology configuration and technology complementarity literature, highlighting a strong correlation between a holistic technology strategy and improved hospital-level performance. These findings encourage hospital administrators and policymakers to support the strategic and integrated implementation of PES, telehealth, and RPM, even after the COVID-19 pandemic has passed.</p>","PeriodicalId":47778,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Management Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient-centric care technology configurations: An exploratory analysis of patient engagement systems, telehealth, and remote patient monitoring in U.S. hospitals.\",\"authors\":\"Jung Young Lee, C Christopher Lee, Jeong Hoon Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/HMR.0000000000000491\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the growing demand for patient-centered care (PCC), there is a limited understanding of how hospitals configure and coordinate patient-facing technologies, such as Patient Engagement Systems (PES), telehealth, and Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM), on a national scale.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study seeks to identify existing technology configurations in U.S. hospitals and analyze the association between these configurations and various hospital performance measures.</p><p><strong>Methodology/approach: </strong>Using cluster analysis on data from over 3,300 U.S. hospitals, we developed a taxonomy of three distinct technology configurations: Patient-Centric Pioneers, Selective Tech Adopters, and Traditional Care Providers. The differences in structural characteristics and performance measures among these groups are statistically analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Hospitals in the Patient-Centric Pioneers group, which fully implement and effectively integrate PES, telehealth, and RPM, consistently outperform the others in terms of efficiency, clinical quality, and patient satisfaction. Selective Tech Adopters displayed the highest manpower productivity. However, they did not achieve better patient satisfaction than Traditional Care Providers with limited technologies.</p><p><strong>Practice implications: </strong>Our research presents a comprehensive, robust empirical taxonomy of PCC technology configuration and technology complementarity literature, highlighting a strong correlation between a holistic technology strategy and improved hospital-level performance. These findings encourage hospital administrators and policymakers to support the strategic and integrated implementation of PES, telehealth, and RPM, even after the COVID-19 pandemic has passed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47778,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Care Management Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Care Management Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000491\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Management Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HMR.0000000000000491","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管对以患者为中心的护理(PCC)的需求不断增长,但人们对医院如何在全国范围内配置和协调面向患者的技术(如患者参与系统(PES)、远程医疗和远程患者监测(RPM))的了解有限。目的:本研究旨在确定美国医院现有的技术配置,并分析这些配置与各种医院绩效指标之间的关系。方法/方法:通过对3300多家美国医院的数据进行聚类分析,我们对三种不同的技术配置进行了分类:以患者为中心的先行者、选择性技术采用者和传统护理提供者。统计分析各组在结构特征和性能指标上的差异。结果:以患者为中心的先锋集团医院全面实施并有效整合了PES、远程医疗和RPM,在效率、临床质量和患者满意度方面始终优于其他医院。选择性技术采用者的人力生产力最高。然而,在技术有限的情况下,他们并没有比传统护理提供者获得更好的患者满意度。实践启示:我们的研究提出了PCC技术配置和技术互补性文献的全面、稳健的实证分类,强调了整体技术战略与提高医院水平绩效之间的强烈相关性。这些发现鼓励医院管理者和政策制定者支持PES、远程医疗和RPM的战略性综合实施,即使在COVID-19大流行过去之后也是如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Patient-centric care technology configurations: An exploratory analysis of patient engagement systems, telehealth, and remote patient monitoring in U.S. hospitals.

Background: Despite the growing demand for patient-centered care (PCC), there is a limited understanding of how hospitals configure and coordinate patient-facing technologies, such as Patient Engagement Systems (PES), telehealth, and Remote Patient Monitoring (RPM), on a national scale.

Purpose: This study seeks to identify existing technology configurations in U.S. hospitals and analyze the association between these configurations and various hospital performance measures.

Methodology/approach: Using cluster analysis on data from over 3,300 U.S. hospitals, we developed a taxonomy of three distinct technology configurations: Patient-Centric Pioneers, Selective Tech Adopters, and Traditional Care Providers. The differences in structural characteristics and performance measures among these groups are statistically analyzed.

Results: Hospitals in the Patient-Centric Pioneers group, which fully implement and effectively integrate PES, telehealth, and RPM, consistently outperform the others in terms of efficiency, clinical quality, and patient satisfaction. Selective Tech Adopters displayed the highest manpower productivity. However, they did not achieve better patient satisfaction than Traditional Care Providers with limited technologies.

Practice implications: Our research presents a comprehensive, robust empirical taxonomy of PCC technology configuration and technology complementarity literature, highlighting a strong correlation between a holistic technology strategy and improved hospital-level performance. These findings encourage hospital administrators and policymakers to support the strategic and integrated implementation of PES, telehealth, and RPM, even after the COVID-19 pandemic has passed.

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
Health Care Management Review
Health Care Management Review HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.00%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Health Care Management Review (HCMR) disseminates state-of-the-art knowledge about management, leadership, and administration of health care systems, organizations, and agencies. Multidisciplinary and international in scope, articles present completed research relevant to health care management, leadership, and administration, as well report on rigorous evaluations of health care management innovations, or provide a synthesis of prior research that results in evidence-based health care management practice recommendations. Articles are theory-driven and translate findings into implications and recommendations for health care administrators, researchers, and faculty.
×
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
小红书