...
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice >Re: Clinical Decisions Made in Primary Care Clinics Before and After Choosing Wisely?
【24h】

Re: Clinical Decisions Made in Primary Care Clinics Before and After Choosing Wisely?

机译:回复:明智选择之前和之后在基层医疗诊所做出的临床决策?

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

To the Editor: Kost and Genoa demonstrated that physician adherence to guidelines for 5 low-value clinical decisions improved through educational interventions.1 They concluded that “primary care physicians respond to training and publicity in low-value care.” This intervention strategy decreased physician-initiated testing that provide little clinical value. In this way, the Choosing Wisely initiative may help to achieve the health care triple aim.2 However, the authors failed to explain why there were drastic differences in responses among the intervention groups. Of the 5 clinical decisions that were targeted, 2 groups (antibiotics for acute sinusitis, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for osteoporosis screening) improved in adherence markedly, and 3 groups (cervical cancer screening, heart disease screening, back pain imaging) did not change significantly. This disparity merits thoughtful discussion and a call for further research.
机译:致编辑:科斯特和热那亚证明,通过教育干预措施,医师对5个低价值临床决策指南的遵守情况得到改善。1他们得出结论,“初级保健医师对低价值护理的培训和宣传做出了反应。”这种干预策略减少了医生启动的测试,几乎没有临床价值。这样,“明智选择”倡议可能有助于实现卫生保健的三重目标。2但是,作者未能解释为什么干预组之间的反应存在巨大差异。在有针对性的5项临床决策中,有2组(用于急性鼻窦炎的抗生素,用于骨质疏松症筛查的双能X线骨密度仪)对依从性的改善明显,而3组(宫颈癌筛查,心脏病筛查,背痛成像)变化不大。这种差异值得进行深思熟虑的讨论,并需要进行进一步的研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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