...
首页> 外文期刊>BMJ: British medical journal >Randomised controlled trial of general practitioner versus usual medical care in an urban accident and emergency department: process, outcome, and comparative cost
【24h】

Randomised controlled trial of general practitioner versus usual medical care in an urban accident and emergency department: process, outcome, and comparative cost

机译:一般的随机对照试验医生和医疗保健的城市事故和急诊:过程,结果,比较成本

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Objective-To see whether care provided by general practitioners to non-emergency patients in an accident and emergency department differs significantly from care by usual accident and emergency staff in terms of process, outcome, and comparative cost. Design-A randomised controlled trial. Setting-A busy inner city hospital's accident and emergency department which employed three local general practitioners on a sessional basis. Patients-All new attenders categorised by the triage system as "semiurgent" or "delay acceptable." 66% of all attenders were eligible for inclusion. Main outcome measures-Numbers of patients undergoing investigation, referral, or prescription; types of disposal; consultation satisfaction scores; reattendance to accident and emergency department within 30 days of index visit; health status at one month; comparative cost differences. Results-4684 patients participated. For semi-urgent patients, by comparison with usual accident and emergency staff, general practitioners investigated fewer patients (relative difference 20%; 95% confidence interval 16% to 25%), referred to other hospital services less often (39%; 28% to 47%), admitted fewer patients (45%; 32% to 56%), and prescribed more often (41%; 30% to 54%). A similar trend was found for patients categorised as delay acceptable and (in a separate analysis) by presenting complaint category. 393 (17%) patients who had been seen by general practitioner staff reattended the department within 30 days of the index visit; 418 patients (18%) seen by accident and emergency staff similarly re-attended. 435 patients (72% of those eligible) completed the consultation satisfaction questionnaire and 258 (59% of those eligible) provided health status information one month after consultation. There were no differences between patients managed by general practitioners and those managed by usual staff regarding consultation satisfaction questionnaire scores or health status. For all patients seen by general practitioners during the study, estimated marginal and total savings were £Ir1427 and £Ir117 005 respectively. Conclusion-General practitioners working as an integral part of an accident and emergency department manage non-emergency accident and emergency attenders safely and use fewer resources than do usual accident and emergency staff.
机译::靠是否提供的护理从业人员在一个非紧急病人事故和应急部门不同从保健常见事故和显著应急人员的过程,结果,和比较成本。审判。事故和急诊工作三个地方开会的全科医生的基础上。分类系统“semiurgent”或“延迟可以接受的。”包容。接受调查的患者,推荐或处方;满意度;急诊科指数的30天内访问;成本差异。参与。与通常的事故和紧急情况员工,全科医生研究更少患者(相对偏差20%;间隔16%到25%),指其他医院服务较少(39%;更少的患者(45%;更多(41%;发现病人归类为延迟可接受的,(在一个单独的分析)提出投诉类别。曾被全科医生的工作人员吗reattended部门的30天内索引访问;和应急人员同样re-attended。病人(72%的人有资格)完成咨询满意度问卷调查和258年(59%的人有资格)提供的健康状况信息咨询。一个月后病人管理没有区别吗全科医生和那些由通常的管理员工关于咨询的满意度问卷成绩或健康状况。期间被全科医生的病人研究中,估计边际和总储蓄Ir1427英镑,英镑Ir117分别005。Conclusion-General从业者作为工作事故和紧急情况的有效组成部分部门管理和非紧急事故紧急安全抱和使用更少资源比以往事故和紧急情况员工。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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