“注意差距”-概述扩展社区医疗保健结果(ECHO)模型在提高医疗保健服务价值方面的作用。

IF 3.1 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
AIMS Public Health Pub Date : 2023-02-22 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.3934/publichealth.2023008
Christina Kenny, Anushree Priyadarshini
{"title":"“注意差距”-概述扩展社区医疗保健结果(ECHO)模型在提高医疗保健服务价值方面的作用。","authors":"Christina Kenny, Anushree Priyadarshini","doi":"10.3934/publichealth.2023008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The ECHO (Extensions Community Healthcare Outcomes) model of healthcare delivery has grown rapidly since its establishment and increased in popularity in recent years. This expansion has developed alongside the growing incidence of chronic diseases and the need to better manage them. The increasing uptake in ECHO has presented a requirement to assess its true value as healthcare costs are increasing globally, resulting in a growing demand by governments and policy makers to ensure chronic disease management strategies provide true value. Therefore, the aim of this review is to examine the impact that ECHO has on clinical practice and how such impacts are measured or evaluated. A narrative literature review is carried out to examine the outcomes assessed in ECHO-related studies. Three key academic databases were utilised for the literature search: Web of Science, PubMed, and Medline. Keywords relating to the review were chosen and searched for. Papers were screened using specified inclusion and exclusion criteria relating to years of publication (2000-2020), type of publication (original research, review papers and meta-analyses) and language requirements (English language only). This review found that while the ECHO model is expanding, and improving the so-called \"knowledge gap\" between specialists and primary care physicians, there is also a gap in the ways value is examined within ECHO. Most studies on ECHO lack an examination of patient reported health outcomes and appropriate, comparative costing methods. Current ECHO-related studies lack vital components that demonstrate the value of the model. Such components include patient reported health outcomes and detailed costing comparisons between the ECHO model and the traditional care pathway it is replacing.</p>","PeriodicalId":45684,"journal":{"name":"AIMS Public Health","volume":"10 1","pages":"94-104"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10091128/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Mind the Gap\\\" - An overview of the role of the Extensions Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) model in enhancing value in health care delivery.\",\"authors\":\"Christina Kenny, Anushree Priyadarshini\",\"doi\":\"10.3934/publichealth.2023008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The ECHO (Extensions Community Healthcare Outcomes) model of healthcare delivery has grown rapidly since its establishment and increased in popularity in recent years. This expansion has developed alongside the growing incidence of chronic diseases and the need to better manage them. The increasing uptake in ECHO has presented a requirement to assess its true value as healthcare costs are increasing globally, resulting in a growing demand by governments and policy makers to ensure chronic disease management strategies provide true value. Therefore, the aim of this review is to examine the impact that ECHO has on clinical practice and how such impacts are measured or evaluated. A narrative literature review is carried out to examine the outcomes assessed in ECHO-related studies. Three key academic databases were utilised for the literature search: Web of Science, PubMed, and Medline. Keywords relating to the review were chosen and searched for. Papers were screened using specified inclusion and exclusion criteria relating to years of publication (2000-2020), type of publication (original research, review papers and meta-analyses) and language requirements (English language only). This review found that while the ECHO model is expanding, and improving the so-called \\\"knowledge gap\\\" between specialists and primary care physicians, there is also a gap in the ways value is examined within ECHO. Most studies on ECHO lack an examination of patient reported health outcomes and appropriate, comparative costing methods. Current ECHO-related studies lack vital components that demonstrate the value of the model. Such components include patient reported health outcomes and detailed costing comparisons between the ECHO model and the traditional care pathway it is replacing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AIMS Public Health\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"94-104\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10091128/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AIMS Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2023008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AIMS Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2023008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

ECHO(扩展社区医疗保健结果)医疗保健服务模式自建立以来发展迅速,近年来越来越受欢迎。与此同时,慢性病发病率不断上升,需要更好地管理这些疾病。随着全球医疗保健成本不断增加,越来越多的人采用回声疗法,这就要求评估其真正价值,从而导致各国政府和决策者越来越多地要求确保慢性病管理战略提供真正价值。因此,本综述的目的是研究ECHO对临床实践的影响以及如何测量或评估这种影响。本文采用叙述性文献综述的方法对回声相关研究的评估结果进行了研究。文献检索使用了三个关键的学术数据库:Web of Science、PubMed和Medline。选择并检索与综述相关的关键词。采用与发表年份(2000-2020年)、发表类型(原始研究、综述论文和荟萃分析)和语言要求(仅限英语)相关的特定纳入和排除标准对论文进行筛选。这篇综述发现,虽然ECHO模型正在扩大,并改善了专家和初级保健医生之间所谓的“知识差距”,但在ECHO内部评估价值的方式上也存在差距。大多数关于超声心动图的研究缺乏对患者报告的健康结果的检查和适当的、比较的成本计算方法。目前与回声相关的研究缺乏证明模型价值的重要组成部分。这些组成部分包括患者报告的健康结果,以及ECHO模式与它所取代的传统护理途径之间详细的成本比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

"Mind the Gap" - An overview of the role of the Extensions Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) model in enhancing value in health care delivery.

"Mind the Gap" - An overview of the role of the Extensions Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) model in enhancing value in health care delivery.

"Mind the Gap" - An overview of the role of the Extensions Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) model in enhancing value in health care delivery.

"Mind the Gap" - An overview of the role of the Extensions Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) model in enhancing value in health care delivery.

The ECHO (Extensions Community Healthcare Outcomes) model of healthcare delivery has grown rapidly since its establishment and increased in popularity in recent years. This expansion has developed alongside the growing incidence of chronic diseases and the need to better manage them. The increasing uptake in ECHO has presented a requirement to assess its true value as healthcare costs are increasing globally, resulting in a growing demand by governments and policy makers to ensure chronic disease management strategies provide true value. Therefore, the aim of this review is to examine the impact that ECHO has on clinical practice and how such impacts are measured or evaluated. A narrative literature review is carried out to examine the outcomes assessed in ECHO-related studies. Three key academic databases were utilised for the literature search: Web of Science, PubMed, and Medline. Keywords relating to the review were chosen and searched for. Papers were screened using specified inclusion and exclusion criteria relating to years of publication (2000-2020), type of publication (original research, review papers and meta-analyses) and language requirements (English language only). This review found that while the ECHO model is expanding, and improving the so-called "knowledge gap" between specialists and primary care physicians, there is also a gap in the ways value is examined within ECHO. Most studies on ECHO lack an examination of patient reported health outcomes and appropriate, comparative costing methods. Current ECHO-related studies lack vital components that demonstrate the value of the model. Such components include patient reported health outcomes and detailed costing comparisons between the ECHO model and the traditional care pathway it is replacing.

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
AIMS Public Health
AIMS Public Health HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
4 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:481959085
Book学术官方微信