开发精神科门诊病人自动监测系统:提高质量的第一步。

HMO practice Pub Date : 1995-12-01
E M Hunkeler, J R Westphal, M Williams
{"title":"开发精神科门诊病人自动监测系统:提高质量的第一步。","authors":"E M Hunkeler,&nbsp;J R Westphal,&nbsp;M Williams","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate an automated system of quality monitoring for psychiatric outpatients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Large outpatient psychiatry clinic in Kaiser Permanente--Northern California.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Approximately 1500 new psychiatric patients and 20 clinicians.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>This system gave clinicians data on new patients from validated instruments before their intake interviews, measured outcomes for the depressed and panic-disordered patients, and monitored the clinic's case-mix.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Clinic case-mix: Axis II disorders (Personality Disorder Questionnaire--Revised); emotional, social and physical functioning (Health Status Questionnaire 2.0); Axis I symptoms (Symptom Checklist-90); depression and panic disorder (Health Outcomes Institute Modules). Clinician reaction to system (telephone interview).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study population was 62.4% female; 73.9% Caucasian; 70% employed; 15.9% had evidence of personality disorder; 63% reduced daily activities because of emotional problems; 18% had depression; 7% had panic disorder. Over 75% of clinicians used the data reports and found them helpful; criticism focused on questionnaire length, inadequate training, numerous false-positives, and insufficient administrative support.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An automated patient monitoring system can be implemented; clinician involvement needs to be significant; more research is needed to establish the usefulness of standardized data and outcomes management.</p>","PeriodicalId":79628,"journal":{"name":"HMO practice","volume":"9 4","pages":"162-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing a system for automated monitoring of psychiatric outpatients: a first step to improve quality.\",\"authors\":\"E M Hunkeler,&nbsp;J R Westphal,&nbsp;M Williams\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate an automated system of quality monitoring for psychiatric outpatients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Large outpatient psychiatry clinic in Kaiser Permanente--Northern California.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Approximately 1500 new psychiatric patients and 20 clinicians.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>This system gave clinicians data on new patients from validated instruments before their intake interviews, measured outcomes for the depressed and panic-disordered patients, and monitored the clinic's case-mix.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Clinic case-mix: Axis II disorders (Personality Disorder Questionnaire--Revised); emotional, social and physical functioning (Health Status Questionnaire 2.0); Axis I symptoms (Symptom Checklist-90); depression and panic disorder (Health Outcomes Institute Modules). Clinician reaction to system (telephone interview).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study population was 62.4% female; 73.9% Caucasian; 70% employed; 15.9% had evidence of personality disorder; 63% reduced daily activities because of emotional problems; 18% had depression; 7% had panic disorder. Over 75% of clinicians used the data reports and found them helpful; criticism focused on questionnaire length, inadequate training, numerous false-positives, and insufficient administrative support.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An automated patient monitoring system can be implemented; clinician involvement needs to be significant; more research is needed to establish the usefulness of standardized data and outcomes management.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79628,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HMO practice\",\"volume\":\"9 4\",\"pages\":\"162-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1995-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HMO practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HMO practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价一种精神科门诊病人质量监测自动化系统。设计:横断面研究。地点:北加州凯撒医疗机构的大型门诊精神病学诊所。参与者:约1500名新精神病患者和20名临床医生。干预措施:该系统为临床医生提供了新患者的数据,这些数据来自于他们入院前的有效仪器,测量了抑郁症和恐慌症患者的结果,并监测了诊所的病例组合。主要结局指标:临床病例组合:II轴障碍(修订人格障碍问卷);情感、社会和身体功能(健康状况问卷2.0);I轴症状(症状检查表-90);抑郁症和恐慌症(健康结果研究所模块)。临床医生对系统的反应(电话访谈)。结果:研究人群中女性占62.4%;73.9%的白人;采用70%;15.9%有人格障碍的证据;63%的人因为情绪问题减少了日常活动;18%的人患有抑郁症;7%的人患有恐慌症。超过75%的临床医生使用了数据报告,并认为它们很有帮助;批评主要集中在问卷长度、培训不足、大量误报和行政支持不足。结论:可实现患者自动化监护系统;临床医生的参与需要显著;需要更多的研究来确定标准化数据和结果管理的有用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Developing a system for automated monitoring of psychiatric outpatients: a first step to improve quality.

Objective: To evaluate an automated system of quality monitoring for psychiatric outpatients.

Design: Cross-sectional study.

Setting: Large outpatient psychiatry clinic in Kaiser Permanente--Northern California.

Participants: Approximately 1500 new psychiatric patients and 20 clinicians.

Interventions: This system gave clinicians data on new patients from validated instruments before their intake interviews, measured outcomes for the depressed and panic-disordered patients, and monitored the clinic's case-mix.

Main outcome measures: Clinic case-mix: Axis II disorders (Personality Disorder Questionnaire--Revised); emotional, social and physical functioning (Health Status Questionnaire 2.0); Axis I symptoms (Symptom Checklist-90); depression and panic disorder (Health Outcomes Institute Modules). Clinician reaction to system (telephone interview).

Results: The study population was 62.4% female; 73.9% Caucasian; 70% employed; 15.9% had evidence of personality disorder; 63% reduced daily activities because of emotional problems; 18% had depression; 7% had panic disorder. Over 75% of clinicians used the data reports and found them helpful; criticism focused on questionnaire length, inadequate training, numerous false-positives, and insufficient administrative support.

Conclusion: An automated patient monitoring system can be implemented; clinician involvement needs to be significant; more research is needed to establish the usefulness of standardized data and outcomes management.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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