Structured Digital Self-Assessment of Patient Anamnesis Prior to Computed Tomography: Performance Evaluation and Added Value.
Computed tomography
Digital informed patient consent
Digital medical history
Mobile devices
Structured anamnesis
Journal
Journal of medical systems
ISSN: 1573-689X
Titre abrégé: J Med Syst
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7806056
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Jan 2021
28 Jan 2021
Historique:
received:
12
10
2020
accepted:
01
12
2020
entrez:
29
1
2021
pubmed:
30
1
2021
medline:
29
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of a tablet-based, digitized structured self-assessment (DSSA) of patient anamnesis (PA) prior to computed tomography (CT). Of the 317 patients consecutively referred for CT, the majority (n = 294) was able to complete the tablet-based questionnaire, which consisted of 67 items covering social anamnesis, lifestyle factors (e.g., tobacco abuse), medical history (e.g., kidney diseases), current symptoms, and the usability of the system. Patients were able to mark unclear questions for a subsequent discussion with the radiologist. Critical issues for the CT examination were structured and automatically highlighted as "red flags" (RFs) in order to improve patient interaction. RFs and marked questions were highly prevalent (69.5% and 26%). Missing creatinine values (33.3%), kidney diseases (14.4%), thyroid diseases (10.6%), metformin (5.5%), claustrophobia (4.1%), allergic reactions to contrast agents (2.4%), and pathological TSH values (2.0%) were highlighted most frequently as RFs. Patient feedback regarding the comprehensibility of the questionnaire and the tablet usability was mainly positive (90.9%; 86.2%). With advanced age, however, patients provided more negative feedback for both (p = 0.007; p = 0.039). The time effort was less than 20 min for 85.1% of patients, and faster patients were significantly younger (p = 0.046). Overall, the DSSA of PA prior to CT shows a high success rate and is well accepted by most patients. RFs and marked questions were common and helped to focus patients' interactions and reporting towards decisive aspects.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33511485
doi: 10.1007/s10916-020-01690-8
pii: 10.1007/s10916-020-01690-8
pmc: PMC7843739
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
30Références
Rofo. 2019 Jun;191(6):540-546
pubmed: 30332688
Eur Heart J. 2016 Jan 1;37(1):63-6
pubmed: 26303835
J Clin Monit Comput. 2017 Feb;31(1):221-225
pubmed: 26715416
J Med Syst. 2017 May;41(5):84
pubmed: 28391455
Am J Med Qual. 2002 Jul-Aug;17(4):126-35
pubmed: 12153065
J Digit Imaging. 2014 Aug;27(4):479-85
pubmed: 24687643
J Digit Imaging. 2013 Jun;26(3):383-92
pubmed: 23250720
Neuroradiology. 2017 Feb;59(2):169-176
pubmed: 28091696
N Engl J Med. 2010 Mar 25;362(12):1066-9
pubmed: 20335582
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2019 Feb 9;76(5):293-300
pubmed: 30753287
J Med Syst. 2018 Dec 10;43(1):14
pubmed: 30535865
Sci Rep. 2020 Jun 11;10(1):9475
pubmed: 32528028
J Gen Intern Med. 2008 Apr;23(4):476-80
pubmed: 18373148
Eur Radiol. 2018 Dec;28(12):5384-5395
pubmed: 30132106
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Apr;97(15):e0388
pubmed: 29642199
Emerg Radiol. 2012 Apr;19(2):127-33
pubmed: 22173819
JAMA. 2005 Mar 9;293(10):1223-38
pubmed: 15755945
Int J Med Inform. 2007 Apr;76(4):283-8
pubmed: 16473548
Stroke. 2017 Nov;48(11):3156-3160
pubmed: 28986425