MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3130077304 · doi:10.1071/ah20190

Virtual models of chronic disease management: lessons from the experiences of virtual care during the COVID-19 response

2021· article· en· W3130077304 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueAustralian Health Review · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Établissements canadiensMichael Smith Health Research BC
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineHealth careDisease managementPandemicTelemedicineTelehealthDiseasePopulation healthChronic careMedical emergencyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)NursingFamily medicinePublic healthChronic disease

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Objective This study examined Gold Coast staff and patient experiences with the rapid expansion of a virtual model of chronic disease management during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods The study undertook a survey of enrolled patients (n=24) and focus groups with clinical and administrative staff (n=44) delivering chronic disease programs at Gold Coast Health in Queensland. The study also examined routinely collected activity data for the chronic disease programs before COVID (January-February 2020) and for the first 3 months of the COVID-19 response (March-May 2020). Results Chronic disease programs continued to provide similar numbers of appointments over the COVID-19 response period, but there was a marked increase in the proportion of appointments that were delivered virtually, either by telephone or video conference. Most patients were satisfied with their virtual care experiences and felt that their health care needs were met. Conclusions The COVID-19 response provided an opportunity to learn and further develop models of virtual care. Staff and patients were generally supportive of continuing to include virtual appointments in the future. Ongoing concerns were predominantly around the support available to patients and staff to ensure they are trained and equipped to manage the technology and new mode of communicating. What is known about the topic? Emerging evidence suggests that virtual models of health care delivery, such as telephone and video consultations and remote patient monitoring, can be safe and cost-effective alternatives to traditional face-to-face chronic disease management programs. Virtual care is associated with equal or improved clinical outcomes, as well as efficiency improvements, such as reduced failure to attend rates. What does this paper add? The increasing burden of chronic disease across Australia, as well as the need to minimise the risk of vulnerable patient groups attending in-hospital appointments where it is safe and appropriate to do so, means that expanding the delivery of virtual chronic disease management will become increasingly necessary. The results of this study provide an opportunity to learn from a rapid rollout of virtual care for these staff and patient groups and will help inform advances in this area. What are the implications for practitioners? Existing evidence, demographic pressures and the COVID-19 pandemic response all point to virtual care as a viable and safe alternative to traditional models of chronic disease management. The lessons presented here provide more detailed guidance on the support that staff and patients require to ensure virtual care is a seamless and safe alternative or adjunct to traditional chronic disease management programs.

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.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,390
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,704

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,128
Tête enseignante GPT0,448
Écart entre enseignants0,321 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle