Experience with Quality Assurance in Two Store-and-Forward Telemedicine Networks
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Despite the increasing use of telemedicine around the world, little has been done to incorporate quality assurance (QA) into these operations. The purpose of the present study was to examine the feasibility of QA in store-and-forward teleconsulting using a previously published framework. During a 2-year study period, we examined the feasibility of using QA tools in two mature telemedicine networks [Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) and New Zealand Teledermatology (NZT)]. The tools included performance reporting to assess trends, automated follow-up of patients to obtain outcomes data, automated surveying of referrers to obtain user feedback, and retrospective assessment of randomly selected cases to assess quality. In addition, the senior case coordinators in each network were responsible for identifying potential adverse events from email reports received from users. During the study period, there were 149 responses to the patient follow-up questions relating to the 1241 MSF cases (i.e., 12% of cases), and there were 271 responses to the follow-up questions relating to the 639 NZT cases (i.e., 42% of cases). The collection of user feedback reports was combined with the collection of patient follow-up data, thus producing the same response rates. The outcomes data suggested that the telemedicine advice proved useful for the referring doctor in the majority of cases and was likely to benefit the patient. The user feedback was overwhelmingly positive, over 90% of referrers in the two networks finding the advice received to be of educational benefit. The feedback also suggested that the teleconsultation had provided cost savings in about 20% of cases, either to the patient/family, or to the hospital/clinic treating the patient. Various problems were detected by regular monitoring, and certain adverse events were identified from email reports by the users. A single aberrant quality reading was detected by using a process control chart. The present study demonstrates that a QA program is feasible in store-and-forward telemedicine, and shows that it was useful in two different networks, because certain problems were detected (and then solved) that would not have been identified until much later. It seems likely that QA could be used much more widely in telemedicine generally to benefit patient care.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,035 | 0,064 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».