远程医疗与临床就诊间移植药师治疗决策的比较。

IF 0.6 4区 医学 Q4 SURGERY
Jiashan Xu-Stettner, Amy N Thompson, Linda J Fitzgerald, Tracy Licari, Katie A McMurry, Sarah Tischer
{"title":"远程医疗与临床就诊间移植药师治疗决策的比较。","authors":"Jiashan Xu-Stettner,&nbsp;Amy N Thompson,&nbsp;Linda J Fitzgerald,&nbsp;Tracy Licari,&nbsp;Katie A McMurry,&nbsp;Sarah Tischer","doi":"10.1177/15269248231164161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> Implementation of telehealth in high-risk patient populations provides opportunities for continuous interactions and has previously been shown to positively impact practice. However, there is a paucity of studies focused on telehealth in the liver transplant population specific to pharmacist care. <b>Project Aim:</b> Describe the importance of transplant pharmacist treatment decisions between telehealth, in-clinic, and asynchronous (eg chart review and electronic message support) visit types. <b>Design:</b> This was a single-center comparative evaluation of adult liver transplant recipients transplanted between May 1, 2020 and October 31, 2020 with a transplant pharmacist visit between May 1, 2020 and November 30, 2020. The primary outcome was the average number of treatment decisions per encounter and the average number of important treatment decisions per encounter. The importance of these treatment decisions was determined by a panel of three clinicians. <b>Results:</b> Twenty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria with 85 in-clinic, 42 telehealth, and 55 asynchronous visits. For all treatment decisions, there was no statistical difference in average number of treatment decisions per encounter between telehealth visits and in-clinic visits with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.822 (95% CI, 0.674-1.000; <i>P</i> = 0.051). Similarly, for important treatment decisions, there was no statistical difference between telehealth visits and in-clinic visits (OR 0.847; 95% CI, 0.642-1.116; <i>P</i> = 0.238). <b>Conclusion:</b> Transplant pharmacists can deliver recommendations with similar importance via telehealth compared to in-clinic visits based on the number of total and important treatment decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":20671,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Transplantation","volume":"33 2","pages":"156-161"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Transplant Pharmacist Treatment Decisions Between Telehealth and Clinic Visits.\",\"authors\":\"Jiashan Xu-Stettner,&nbsp;Amy N Thompson,&nbsp;Linda J Fitzgerald,&nbsp;Tracy Licari,&nbsp;Katie A McMurry,&nbsp;Sarah Tischer\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15269248231164161\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> Implementation of telehealth in high-risk patient populations provides opportunities for continuous interactions and has previously been shown to positively impact practice. However, there is a paucity of studies focused on telehealth in the liver transplant population specific to pharmacist care. <b>Project Aim:</b> Describe the importance of transplant pharmacist treatment decisions between telehealth, in-clinic, and asynchronous (eg chart review and electronic message support) visit types. <b>Design:</b> This was a single-center comparative evaluation of adult liver transplant recipients transplanted between May 1, 2020 and October 31, 2020 with a transplant pharmacist visit between May 1, 2020 and November 30, 2020. The primary outcome was the average number of treatment decisions per encounter and the average number of important treatment decisions per encounter. The importance of these treatment decisions was determined by a panel of three clinicians. <b>Results:</b> Twenty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria with 85 in-clinic, 42 telehealth, and 55 asynchronous visits. For all treatment decisions, there was no statistical difference in average number of treatment decisions per encounter between telehealth visits and in-clinic visits with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.822 (95% CI, 0.674-1.000; <i>P</i> = 0.051). Similarly, for important treatment decisions, there was no statistical difference between telehealth visits and in-clinic visits (OR 0.847; 95% CI, 0.642-1.116; <i>P</i> = 0.238). <b>Conclusion:</b> Transplant pharmacists can deliver recommendations with similar importance via telehealth compared to in-clinic visits based on the number of total and important treatment decisions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20671,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Progress in Transplantation\",\"volume\":\"33 2\",\"pages\":\"156-161\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Progress in Transplantation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15269248231164161\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15269248231164161","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:在高危患者群体中实施远程医疗为持续互动提供了机会,以前已证明对实践产生了积极影响。然而,有一个缺乏研究集中在远程医疗的肝移植人群具体到药剂师护理。项目目标:描述移植药剂师在远程医疗、门诊和异步(如图表审查和电子信息支持)访问类型之间的治疗决策的重要性。设计:这是一项单中心比较评估,对2020年5月1日至2020年10月31日期间移植的成人肝移植受者进行评估,并在2020年5月1日至2020年11月30日期间进行移植药剂师访问。主要结果是每次就诊的平均治疗决策数和每次就诊的平均重要治疗决策数。这些治疗决定的重要性由三位临床医生组成的小组决定。结果:28例患者符合纳入标准,其中临床就诊85例,远程就诊42例,非同步就诊55例。对于所有的治疗决策,每次就诊的平均治疗决策数在远程医疗访问和门诊访问之间没有统计学差异,优势比(OR)为0.822 (95% CI, 0.674-1.000;p = 0.051)。同样,对于重要的治疗决策,远程医疗访问与门诊访问之间无统计学差异(OR 0.847;95% ci, 0.642-1.116;p = 0.238)。结论:移植药剂师可以通过远程医疗提供与门诊就诊同等重要的建议,基于总数量和重要的治疗决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Transplant Pharmacist Treatment Decisions Between Telehealth and Clinic Visits.

Introduction: Implementation of telehealth in high-risk patient populations provides opportunities for continuous interactions and has previously been shown to positively impact practice. However, there is a paucity of studies focused on telehealth in the liver transplant population specific to pharmacist care. Project Aim: Describe the importance of transplant pharmacist treatment decisions between telehealth, in-clinic, and asynchronous (eg chart review and electronic message support) visit types. Design: This was a single-center comparative evaluation of adult liver transplant recipients transplanted between May 1, 2020 and October 31, 2020 with a transplant pharmacist visit between May 1, 2020 and November 30, 2020. The primary outcome was the average number of treatment decisions per encounter and the average number of important treatment decisions per encounter. The importance of these treatment decisions was determined by a panel of three clinicians. Results: Twenty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria with 85 in-clinic, 42 telehealth, and 55 asynchronous visits. For all treatment decisions, there was no statistical difference in average number of treatment decisions per encounter between telehealth visits and in-clinic visits with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.822 (95% CI, 0.674-1.000; P = 0.051). Similarly, for important treatment decisions, there was no statistical difference between telehealth visits and in-clinic visits (OR 0.847; 95% CI, 0.642-1.116; P = 0.238). Conclusion: Transplant pharmacists can deliver recommendations with similar importance via telehealth compared to in-clinic visits based on the number of total and important treatment decisions.

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
Progress in Transplantation
Progress in Transplantation SURGERY-TRANSPLANTATION
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
44
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Progress in Transplantation (PIT) is the official journal of NATCO, The Organization for Transplant Professionals. Journal Partners include: Australasian Transplant Coordinators Association and Society for Transplant Social Workers. PIT reflects the multi-disciplinary team approach to procurement and clinical aspects of organ and tissue transplantation by providing a professional forum for exchange of the continually changing body of knowledge in transplantation.
×
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