...
首页> 外文期刊>Pediatric critical care medicine: a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies >Survey of in-house coverage by pediatric intensivists: Characterization of 24/7 in-hospital pediatric critical care faculty coverage
【24h】

Survey of in-house coverage by pediatric intensivists: Characterization of 24/7 in-hospital pediatric critical care faculty coverage

机译:儿科专科医生的内部覆盖范围调查:24/7医院内儿科重症监护教师覆盖范围的特征

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: To characterize the current state of 24/7 in-hospital pediatric intensivist coverage in academic PICUs, including perceptions of faculty and trainees regarding the advantages and disadvantages of in-hospital coverage. Design: Cross-sectional observational study via web-based survey. Setting: PICUs at North American academic institutions. Subjects: Pediatric intensivists, pediatric critical care fellows, and pediatric residents. Interventions: None. Measurements and main results: A total of 1,323 responses were received representing a center response rate of 74% (147 of 200). Ninety percent of respondents stated that in-hospital coverage is good for patient care, and 85% stated that in-hospital coverage provides safer care. Sixty-three percent of intensivists stated that working in in-hospital models limits academic productivity, and 65% stated that in-hospital models interfere with nonclinical responsibilities. When compared with intensivists in home coverage models, intensivists working in in-hospital models generally had more favorable perceptions of the effects of in-hospital on patient care (p < 0.0001) and faculty quality of life. Physician burnout was measured with the abbreviated Maslach Burnout Inventory. Although 57% of intensivists responded that working in in-hospital models increases burnout risk, burnout scores were not different between coverage models. Seventy-nine percent of intensivists currently working at institutions with in-hospital coverage stated that they would prefer to work in an in-hospital coverage model, compared with 31% of those working in a home coverage model (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Although concerns exist regarding the effect of 24/7 in-hospital coverage on faculty, the majority of pediatric intensivists and critical care trainees responded that in-hospital coverage by intensivists is good for patient care. The majority of intensivists also state that they would prefer to work at an institution with in-hospital coverage. Further research is needed to objectively delineate the effects of in-hospital coverage on both patients and faculty.
机译:目的:描述学术性重症监护病房中24/7儿科儿科强化病治疗的现状,包括教职员工和受训者对院内治疗优缺点的看法。设计:通过基于网络的调查进行横断面观察研究。地点:北美学术机构的PICU。受试者:儿科专科医师,儿科重症监护医师和儿科住院医师。干预措施:无。测量和主要结果:总共收到1,323份答复,代表中心答复率为74%(200份中的147份)。 90%的受访者表示院内覆盖对患者护理有益,而85%的受访者表示院内覆盖可提供更安全的护理。 63%的强化医生说,在医院模型中工作会限制学术生产率,而65%的专家指出,医院模型会干扰非临床责任。与家庭覆盖模型中的强化医生相比,在医院模型中工作的强化医生通常对医院对患者护理的影响(p <0.0001)和教师的生活质量有更好的理解。用缩写的Maslach倦怠量表测量医师的倦怠。尽管57%的强化医生回答说,在医院内模型中工作会增加倦怠风险,但在覆盖率模型之间,倦怠分数没有差异。目前在医院内部保险机构工作的强化医生中,有79%的人表示,他们更喜欢在医院内部保险模式下工作,而在家庭保险模式下的工作人员为31%(p <0.0001)。结论:尽管存在对24/7院内覆盖对教师的影响的担忧,但大多数儿科专科医师和重症监护学员回答说,专科医师在院内覆盖对患者的护理有益。大多数强化治疗师还指出,他们希望在医院内有医疗服务的机构工作。需要进一步的研究来客观地描述医院内覆盖对患者和教职员工的影响。

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