A88 PATIENT AND PHYSICIAN PERSPECTIVE OF TELE-HEALTH IN GASTROENTEROLOGY
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Given the social distancing measures employed to reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, tele-health has rapidly expanded and is now routinely used in new patient encounters and in follow up appointments across Canada. Aims To determine the patient and physician perspective towards tele-health in a gastroenterology outpatient setting. Methods An anonymous voluntary online survey was distributed to patients who had previously undergone at least one tele-health visit in a tertiary care gastroenterology outpatient setting. A separate online survey was distributed to gastroenterologists practising across Canada. Results A total of 181 patients from British Columbia (59.8% female) completed the survey. The tele-health appointment was the first visit for 21.8% of patients. Appointments occurred by phone call alone (61.4%) or by video and audio software (38.6%) and started within 5 minutes of the scheduled time in 75% of visits. Patient satisfaction with the tele-health visit was high (8.54 on a scale of 0–10; 0 completely dissatisfied, 10 extremely satisfied; IQR 8–10). Most patients did not perceive a difference in likelihood of compliance compared to a non-tele-health visit (90.6%), were not concerned about the lack of physical exam during a tele-health visit (82.4%) and did not with-hold information they would have revealed in person (88.7%). After the COVID-19 pandemic, some patients would prefer tele-heath visits (39.2%), whereas others would prefer in office visits (28.5%) and the remainder were indifferent (32.3%). Post-pandemic, most patients would prefer tele-health for follow up visits (68.4%), over tele-health for all possible visits (27.9%) or no tele-health visits (3.8%). A total of 25 Canadian gastroenterologists (28.0% female; 60% academic practice, 40% community practice) completed a separate survey. Regarding the lack of physical exam in tele-health, 44% of physicians believed this did not affect the quality of their assessment, whereas some physicians believed it had either minimally (48%) or greatly (8%) impaired the quality of their assessment. Almost all physicians (96%) perceived that patients either appreciate tele-health as much as or more than in office visits. Post-pandemic, most physicians (96%) supported a hybrid model of both tele-health and in office visits. Appointments for follow up of benign endoscopic pathology results (96%), follow up visits (92%), consultations prior to endoscopy (76%) were deemed to be most appropriate for tele-health. Follow up of malignant pathology results (24%) and consultations for new patients (32%) were thought to be less appropriate for tele-health visits. Conclusions Patient and physician satisfaction with tele-health in a Canadian outpatient gastroenterology setting is high. Most patients and physicians wish for tele-health to remain available in the post-pandemic setting. Funding Agencies Gastrointestinal Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia
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 | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 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 ».