Author
Listed:
- Tarig Osman
(Centre for Population Health Sciences, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 308232, Singapore)
- Eileen Lew
(Department of Women’s Anaesthesia, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Singapore 229899, Singapore)
- Elaine Lum
(Centre for Population Health Sciences, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 308232, Singapore
Health Services and Systems Research, Duke-NUS Medical School Singapore 169857, Singapore)
- Jennifer Chew
(Department of Women’s Anaesthesia, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Singapore 229899, Singapore)
- Rajive Dabas
(Department of Women’s Anaesthesia, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Singapore 229899, Singapore)
- Ban Leong Sng
(Department of Women’s Anaesthesia, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Singapore 229899, Singapore)
- Josip Car
(Centre for Population Health Sciences, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 308232, Singapore
Global eHealth Unit, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK)
Abstract
Preanaesthesia health assessment is gradually transitioning from paper-based, face-to-face assessment to digitized assessment, self-administered by the patient. This transition could potentially optimize the various goals of assessment, notably facilitating the efficient collection of the patient’s health information. We have previously developed and validated a tablet application (PreAnaesThesia Computerized Health assessment application or “PATCH”) for patients to conduct preanaesthesia self-assessment. In a randomized controlled trial, we sought to compare the duration of nurse–patient consultation and patient satisfaction between patients who underwent PATCH self-assessment vs. standard care nurse-led assessment. Fifty-two elective surgical patients were randomized to complete either PATCH assessment or standard care nurse-led assessment at an outpatient preoperative clinic. The duration of nurse–patient consultation was subsequently noted for all patients who also completed a satisfaction survey. The mean (SD) nurse–patient consultation times in the PATCH and standard care groups were comparable, at 11.5 (3.6) min and 12.2 (2.9) min, respectively ( p = 0.703). Overall satisfaction scores were also comparable, at 23.9 and 27.0 respectively ( p = 0.451) for the PATCH and standard nurse assessment groups. Favorable perceptions of PATCH among users ranged between 41.7% and 79.2%. In conclusion, PATCH self-assessment can feasibly be introduced into current practice with comparable nurse–patient consultation times and patient satisfaction.
Suggested Citation
Tarig Osman & Eileen Lew & Elaine Lum & Jennifer Chew & Rajive Dabas & Ban Leong Sng & Josip Car, 2020.
"Effect of PreAnaesThesia Computerized Health (PATCH) Assessment on Duration of Nurse—Patient Consultation and Patient Experience: A Pilot Trial,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-10, July.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:14:p:4972-:d:382754
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:14:p:4972-:d:382754. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.