首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Archives of Emergency Medicine >Hospital or general practice? Results of two experiments limiting the number of self referrals of patients with injuries to hospitals in The Netherlands.
【2h】

Hospital or general practice? Results of two experiments limiting the number of self referrals of patients with injuries to hospitals in The Netherlands.

机译:医院还是普通科?两项实验的结果限制了荷兰受伤医院患者的自我转诊次数。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To describe the results of two Dutch experiments aimed at limiting the number of self referrals to accident and emergency (A&E) departments of a newly opened hospital. METHODS: Basic design for both field experiments was a one group test-retest study, with the opening of a new hospital being the experimental factor. Data refer (1) to the number of patient contacts for acute somatic and non-somatic professional help with traumata and intoxications filled in on contact registration forms, and (2) to patient reports based on written questionnaires and interviews by telephone. RESULTS: Both studies show that it is possible to limit the number of self referrals, although it is important to be aware of possible side effects. The solution chosen in one of the cities, with patients visiting the A&E department being sent back to a general practitioner, was highly effective but resulted in a series of complaints from the public. This forced the authorities to abandon their original policy. The model chosen in the other city, with two specialized health centres serving as an alternative for the free A&E department of the new hospital, was somewhat less successful in preventing patients from going directly to a hospital, but was much more acceptable for the public. CONCLUSIONS: Both studies showed that controlling the number of self referrals to the A&E departments of hospitals is possible. However, the more rigid the model, the more difficult it will be to have this model accepted by patients. Based on arguments like cost-effectiveness, a better solution might be not to discourage people from going to the hospital with minor injuries, but to integrate primary health care (PHC) and hospital facilities.
机译:目的:描述两个荷兰实验的结果,这些实验旨在限制向新开业医院的急诊科(A&E)进行自我推荐的次数。方法:这两个现场实验的基本设计是一组再测试研究,新医院的开业是实验因素。数据指的是(1)填写在联系登记表中的因创伤和中毒引起的急性躯体和非躯体专业帮助的患者联系数,以及(2)基于书面问卷和电话访谈的患者报告。结果:两项研究均表明可以限制自我推荐的次数,尽管重要的是要注意可能的副作用。在其中一个城市中选择的解决方案非常有效,但将前往急诊室的患者送回了全科医生,虽然效果很好,但是却引起了公众的一系列投诉。这迫使当局放弃了原来的政策。在另一个城市选择的模式有两个专门的保健中心,作为新医院免费急症室的替代方案,在阻止患者直接去医院方面取得的成功并不那么成功,但公众接受程度却更高。结论:两项研究均表明,控制向医院急诊科自我推荐的次数是可能的。但是,模型越严格,患者就越难以接受该模型。基于成本效益之类的观点,更好的解决方案可能不是不劝阻受轻伤的人去医院,而应整合初级卫生保健(PHC)和医院设施。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号