Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 9 de 9
Filtrar
1.
J Med Internet Res ; 25: e43803, 2023 06 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20241941

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In the context of a deepening global shortage of health workers and, in particular, the COVID-19 pandemic, there is growing international interest in, and use of, online symptom checkers (OSCs). However, the evidence surrounding the triage and diagnostic accuracy of these tools remains inconclusive. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to summarize the existing peer-reviewed literature evaluating the triage accuracy (directing users to appropriate services based on their presenting symptoms) and diagnostic accuracy of OSCs aimed at lay users for general health concerns. METHODS: Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC), and Web of Science, as well as the citations of the studies selected for full-text screening. We included peer-reviewed studies published in English between January 1, 2010, and February 16, 2022, with a controlled and quantitative assessment of either or both triage and diagnostic accuracy of OSCs directed at lay users. We excluded tools supporting health care professionals, as well as disease- or specialty-specific OSCs. Screening and data extraction were carried out independently by 2 reviewers for each study. We performed a descriptive narrative synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 21,296 studies were identified, of which 14 (0.07%) were included. The included studies used clinical vignettes, medical records, or direct input by patients. Of the 14 studies, 6 (43%) reported on triage and diagnostic accuracy, 7 (50%) focused on triage accuracy, and 1 (7%) focused on diagnostic accuracy. These outcomes were assessed based on the diagnostic and triage recommendations attached to the vignette in the case of vignette studies or on those provided by nurses or general practitioners, including through face-to-face and telephone consultations. Both diagnostic accuracy and triage accuracy varied greatly among OSCs. Overall diagnostic accuracy was deemed to be low and was almost always lower than that of the comparator. Similarly, most of the studies (9/13, 69 %) showed suboptimal triage accuracy overall, with a few exceptions (4/13, 31%). The main variables affecting the levels of diagnostic and triage accuracy were the severity and urgency of the condition, the use of artificial intelligence algorithms, and demographic questions. However, the impact of each variable differed across tools and studies, making it difficult to draw any solid conclusions. All included studies had at least one area with unclear risk of bias according to the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. CONCLUSIONS: Although OSCs have potential to provide accessible and accurate health advice and triage recommendations to users, more research is needed to validate their triage and diagnostic accuracy before widescale adoption in community and health care settings. Future studies should aim to use a common methodology and agreed standard for evaluation to facilitate objective benchmarking and validation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020215210; https://tinyurl.com/3949zw83.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Triaje , Humanos , Triaje/métodos , Inteligencia Artificial , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Pandemias , Algoritmos , Prueba de COVID-19
2.
BJGP Open ; 2023 Jun 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20233748

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In England, Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) (now replaced by Integrated Care Systems (ICS)) and Primary Care Network (PCN) professionals support primary care prescribers to optimise antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). AIM: To explore views and experiences of CCG/PCN staff in supporting AMS, and the impact of COVID-19 on this support. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative interview study in primary care in England. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews-with staff from CCG/PCNs responsible for AMS-at two time-points, via telephone interviews. These were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Twenty-seven interviews were conducted with 14 participants (nine CCG, five PCN) in Dec 2020/Jan 2021 and Feb/Mar 2021.We found that AMS support was 1) deprioritised- to keep general practice operational and deliver COVID-19 vaccines; 2) disrupted-as social distancing made it harder to build relationships, conduct routine AMS activities, and challenge prescribing decisions; and 3) adapted-with opportunities identified for greater use of technology and from changed patient/public perceptions of viruses and self-care. We also found that resources to support AMS were valued if they were both novel, to counter AMS 'fatigue', and sufficiently familiar to fit with existing/future AMS. CONCLUSION: AMS needs to be reprioritised in general practice in the post-pandemic era and within the new ICS in England. This should include interventions/strategies that combine novel elements with already familiar strategies to refresh prescribers' motivation and opportunity for AMS. Behaviour change interventions should be aimed at improving the culture and processes for how PCN pharmacists voice concerns about AMS to prescribers in general practice and take advantage of the changed patient/public perceptions of viruses and self-care.

3.
Int J Integr Care ; 23(2): 23, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20232921

RESUMEN

Multidisciplinary team (MDT) working is essential to optimise and integrate services for people who are frail. MDTs require collaboration. Many health and social care professionals have not received formal training in collaborative working. This study investigated MDT training designed to help participants deliver integrated care for frail individuals during the Covid-19 pandemic. Researchers utilised a semi-structured analytical framework to support observations of the training sessions and analyse the results of two surveys designed to assess the training process and its impact on participants knowledge and skills. 115 participants from 5 Primary Care Networks in London attended the training. Trainers utilised a video of a patient pathway, encouraged discussion of it, and demonstrated the use of evidence-based tools for patient needs assessment and care planning. Participants were encouraged to critique the patient pathway, reflect on their own experiences of planning and providing patient care. 38% of participants completed a pre-training survey, 47% a post-training survey. Significant improvement in knowledge and skills were reported including understanding roles in contributing to MDT working, confidence to speak in MDT meetings, using a range of evidence-based clinical tools for comprehensive assessment and care planning. Greater levels of autonomy, resilience, and support for MDT working were reported. Training proved effective; it could be scaled up and adopted to other settings.

6.
Antibiotics (Basel) ; 10(12)2021 Dec 14.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1572351

RESUMEN

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the delivery of primary care services. We aimed to identify general practitioners' (GPs') perceptions and experiences of how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced antibiotic prescribing and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in general practice in England. Twenty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 GPs at two time-points: autumn 2020 (14 interviews) and spring 2021 (10 interviews). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically, taking a longitudinal approach. Participants reported a lower threshold for antibiotic prescribing (and fewer consultations) for respiratory infections and COVID-19 symptoms early in the pandemic, then returning to more usual (pre-pandemic) prescribing. They perceived the pandemic as having had less impact on antibiotic prescribing for urinary and skin infections. Participants perceived the changing ways of working and consulting (e.g., proportions of remote and in-person consultations) in addition to changing patient presentations and GP workloads as influencing the fluctuations in antibiotic prescribing. This was compounded by decreased engagement with, and priority of, AMS due to COVID-19-related urgent priorities. Re-engagement with AMS is needed, e.g., through reviving antibiotic prescribing feedback and targets/incentives. The pandemic disrupted, and required adaptations in, the usual ways of working and AMS. It is now important to identify opportunities, e.g., for re-organising ways of managing infections and AMS in the future.

7.
BMJ Open ; 11(10): e051409, 2021 10 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1476602

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To summarise the literature on frequent attendances to hospital emergency departments (EDs) and describe sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of children who attend EDs frequently. SETTING: Hospital EDs. PARTICIPANTS: Children <21 years, attending hospital EDs frequently. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes measures were defined separately in each study, and were predominantly the number of ED attendances per year. RESULTS: We included 21 studies representing 6 513 627 children. Between 0.3% and 75% of all paediatric ED users were frequent users. Most studies defined four or more visits per year as a 'frequent ED' usage. Children who were frequent ED users were more likely to be less than 5 years old. In the USA, patients with public insurance were more likely to be frequent attenders. Frequent ED users more likely to be frequent users of primary care and have long-term conditions; the most common diagnoses were infections and gastroenteritis. CONCLUSIONS: The review included a wide range of information across various health systems, however, children who were frequent ED users have some universal characteristics in common. Policies to reduce frequent attendance might usefully focus on preschool children and supporting primary care in responding to primary care oriented conditions.


Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Atención Primaria de Salud , Niño , Preescolar , Hospitales , Humanos , Asistencia Médica , Periodicidad
8.
Psychosom Med ; 83(4): 380-386, 2021 05 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1165577

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Primary care physicians (PCPs) play a key role in responding to the COVID-19 epidemic. The objective of this study was to explore the influencing factors associated with self-reported psychological distress among a sample of PCPs in China in relation to COVID-19. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to a sample of PCPs in Chengdu city between February 10 and February 13, 2020. The survey consisted of three sections: demographic characteristics, COVID-19-related questions, and the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12). After 5 months, a follow-up survey investigating the change of the GHQ-12 was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 712 PCPs completed the baseline survey (11.8% of those invited), 55.6% were female and 74.4% were aged between 30 and 49 years. High levels of psychological distress (GHQ-12 ≥3) were observed in 29.2% and were associated with low preparedness, high work impact, working with infected residents, personal life impact, and concerns, as well as older age and being married (p values < .05). Logistic regression analysis showed that psychological distress was associated with low preparedness (odds ratio [OR] = 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.87-0.96), high work impact (OR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.03-1.20), personal life impact (OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.07-1.17), and safety-related concerns (OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.02-1.16). At the 5-month assessment point, high psychological distress was less frequent (21.8%). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has resulted in high levels of distress in approximately 30% of PCPs in China. Factors associated with high psychological distress levels include low preparedness and high levels of work impact, personal life impact, and concerns. These findings highlight the importance of enhancing psychological health throughout the course of infectious pandemics.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/psicología , Estrés Laboral/etiología , Médicos de Atención Primaria/psicología , Distrés Psicológico , Adulto , COVID-19/epidemiología , China/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estrés Laboral/epidemiología , Pandemias/estadística & datos numéricos , Médicos de Atención Primaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Riesgo , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
9.
J Med Internet Res ; 22(11): e23482, 2020 11 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-976120

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There has been growing international interest in performing remote consultations in primary care, particularly amidst the current COVID-19 pandemic. Despite this, the evidence surrounding the safety of remote consultations is inconclusive. The appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in remote consultations is an important aspect of patient safety that needs to be addressed. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to summarize evidence on the impact of remote consultation in primary care with regard to antibiotic prescribing. METHODS: Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, HMIC, PsycINFO, and CINAHL for literature published since the databases' inception to February 2020. Peer-reviewed studies conducted in primary health care settings were included. All remote consultation types were considered, and studies were required to report any quantitative measure of antibiotic prescribing to be included in this systematic review. Studies were excluded if there were no comparison groups (face-to-face consultations). RESULTS: In total, 12 studies were identified. Of these, 4 studies reported higher antibiotic-prescribing rates, 5 studies reported lower antibiotic-prescribing rates, and 3 studies reported similar antibiotic-prescribing rates in remote consultations compared with face-to-face consultations. Guideline-concordant prescribing was not significantly different between remote and face-to-face consultations for patients with sinusitis, but conflicting results were found for patients with acute respiratory infections. Mixed evidence was found for follow-up visit rates after remote and face-to-face consultations. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to confidently conclude that remote consulting has a significant impact on antibiotic prescribing in primary care. However, studies indicating higher prescribing rates in remote consultations than in face-to-face consultations are a concern. Further, well-conducted studies are needed to inform safe and appropriate implementation of remote consulting to ensure that there is no unintended impact on antimicrobial resistance.


Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Atención Primaria de Salud/métodos , Consulta Remota/métodos , SARS-CoV-2/efectos de los fármacos , Adulto , Antibacterianos/farmacología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA