门诊患者医疗服务感受度影响因素研究

??????? 目的 了解门诊患者对就医服务感受度影响因素,以期提高患者满意度。 方法 现场问卷调查法、专家访谈法。 结果 患者在门诊过程中最为关注的就诊流程、等候时间、就医环境、医德医风四个因素,非常看重医护人员服务规范,服务流程便捷流畅。病情不同患者对等候时间要求不同,对医院熟悉程度与就诊环境感受度不同。结论 在门诊服务中为患者提供便捷流畅、规范化的服务,同时应注重患者的不同服务需求。     

我院实施“无障碍就医”的做法与成效

自2013年开始,青岛大学医学院附属医院实施“无障碍就医”以来,医院在各个方面都取得了显著成效。文章通过对“无障碍就医”工程实施的动因、意义、主要做法和成效进行剖析,为公立医院探索内部管理方式改革,实现患者便捷就医、安全就医的目标,缓解群众“看病难、看病贵”问题提供了有益的借鉴。     

塑造妇幼保健院智慧门诊的设想与探索

基于“云”“大”“物”“移”“智”信息技术，提出了妇幼保健智慧门诊的设想，对以信息集成平台为基础，由五大业务应用系统组成的智慧门诊信息系统构架进行了阐述，讨论了在预约挂号、就诊检查、诊间结算、充值缴费、结果的单次门诊就诊闭环中优化流程、提高效率、改善就医体验等方面的方法。     

对新医改下病人就医需求的认识与思考

“以病人为中心”是全球一致认同的观点。病人到医院就医时的需求是什么,并未被所有医护人员所理解。在医药卫生体制改革的背景下,如果弄不清病人就医需求是什么,医改就不能满足大众和社会的需求。通过对病人就医心理的分析,阐述了病人对医院和医生的需求,概括起来就是“4C”,包括：方便、关爱、疗效和费用。这四个方面是改善医患关系、防范医疗风险、保障医改成功的重要因素。     

湖北省医院门诊药事服务项目界定及服务成本测算研究

????? 界定门诊药事服务的项目,测算门诊药事服务成本,推进医院门诊药事服务的开展。通过文献法获得与药事服务的概念及门诊药事服务项目有关的内容,通过专家咨询法和现场调查法,获取开展门诊药事服务的成本资料,运用标准成本测算方法测算湖北省医院门诊基本药事服务成本。 界定了药事服务的概念及门诊药事服务项目,测得湖北省三甲医院门诊药事服务成本为30.02元,二甲医院的门诊药事服务成本为10.44元。建议各级医院按此类标准进行探索性补偿。

     

回归分析在医院门诊量预测的应用

对医院未来发展主要业务数据进行预测是实行医院科学管理的重要手段之一,是制定决策和计划的前提条件。门诊是医院医疗工作的一个重要组成部分,是医院直接对外服务的“窗口”。目前不少的医院都在要求医院职工重视门诊,树立“大门诊”的概念,医院的门诊量是反映医院工作效率的一项重要指标。     

建立门诊医患互动诊疗新模式的探讨

为进一步提高医疗技术资源的应用效能,提高门诊诊疗效率和患者就诊效率,有效缓解门诊“三长一短”的现状,在门诊传统诊治模式的基础上,建立门诊医患互动诊疗新模式,实现科学分诊和交替诊治,开辟患者就诊新流程。就医患者因此避免了相互间的影响,缩短了滞留门诊的时间。医生因此减少了大量的“非技术性”工作,诊疗科室改变了工作中时闲、时忙效率低下的状况。有限的医疗资源,得到更加有效的运用。     

基于远程医疗的异地转诊就医一体化实践探索

为探索借助远程医疗解决异地转诊就医一体化的问题，为异地转诊就医患者提供医疗保障。某医院成立专科疾病医联体，借助远程医疗对异地转诊就医患者提供医疗服务，总结某医院借助远程医疗，以专科疾病医联体进行精准转诊、异地就医，提供医疗保障的实践经验。某医院借助远程医疗，以专科疾病医联体为抓手，制定了精准转诊的规章制度，为异地就医患者提供了更加方便快捷的服务，同时降低了医疗费用，节省了医疗基金的开支，实践效果显著。借助远程医疗，成立专科疾病医联体，可以很好的实现患者精准转诊、精准医疗，解决异地就诊患者“看病难、看病贵”问题，为异地就医患者提供更好的医疗保障，助推实现全国异地就医一体化的大健康战略。     

医疗保险总额预付试点三级医院患者就医感受调查

目的 调查上海市实行医疗保险总额预付的三级医院中患者的就医感受。方法 经培训的调查员应用结构式调查问卷对上海市10家实行医疗保险总额预付的三级医院的699名患者进行面对面访谈，数据分析主要采用描述性统计。结果 城保患者对门诊医生明显减少处方金额（或处方天数）的感受强于非城保患者，城保和非城保患者的住院就医感受差异无显著统计学意义。结论 医疗保险总额预付对上海三级医院患者就医感受的总体效应似偏弱，而且有限的影响主要集中于门诊而非住院环节。     

北京市42所医院门诊预约挂号现状调查

目的 通过调查医院门诊预约挂号服务的内容、形式、管理模式等情况,为提高医院门诊预约挂号服务质量提供建议。方法 通过对2011—2013年北京市共计42所医院门诊预约挂号服务进行全面统计分析,了解其门诊预约挂号服务现状。 结果 目前北京市预约挂号工作呈现覆盖范围广泛、形式多样的特点;患者预约挂号使用率提高,就医习惯逐渐改变。结论医院应多部门协作,提供完善的配套制度、足够的人力资源等作为保障,推动预约挂号工作进一步发展。     

On the origin of the Hirudinea and the demise of the Oligochaeta

The phylogenetic relationships of the Clitellata were investigated with a data set of published and new complete 18S rRNA gene sequences of 51 species representing 41 families. Sequences were aligned on the basis of a secondary structure model and analysed with maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood. In contrast to the latter method, parsimony did not recover the monophyly of Clitellata. However, a close scrutiny of the data suggested a spurious attraction between some polychaetes and clitellates. As a rule, molecular trees are closely aligned with morphology-based phylogenies. Acanthobdellida and Euhirudinea were reconciled in their traditional Hirudinea clade and were included in the Oligochaeta with the Branchiobdellida via the Lumbriculidae as a possible link between the two assemblages. While the 18S gene yielded a meaningful historical signal for determining relationships within clitellates, the exact position of Hirudinea and Branchiobdellida within oligochaetes remained unresolved. The lack of phylogenetic signal is interpreted as evidence for a rapid radiation of these taxa. The placement of Clitellata within the Polychaeta remained unresolved. The biological reality of polytomies within annelids is suggested and supports the hypothesis of an extremely ancient radiation of polychaetes and emergence of clitellates.     

On the ontogeny of the haptor and the evolution of the Monogenea

Data on the ontogeny of the posterior haptor of monogeneans were obtained from more than 150 publications and summarised. These data were plotted into diagrams showing evolutionary capacity levels based on the theory of a progressive evolution of marginal hooks, anchors and other attachment components of the posterior haptor in the Monogenea (Malmberg, 1986). 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks are assumed to be the most primitive monogenean haptoral condition. Thus the diagrams were founded on a 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hook evolutionary capacity level, and the evolutionary capacity levels of anchors and other haptoral attachement components were arranged according to haptoral ontogenetical sequences. In the final plotting diagram data on hosts, type of spermatozoa, oncomiracidial ciliation, sensilla pattern and protonephridial systems were also included. In this way a number of correlations were revealed. Thus, for example, the number of 5 + 5 marginal hooks correlates with the most primitive monogenean type of spermatozoon and with few sensillae, many ciliated cells and a simple protonephridial system in the oncomiracidium. On the basis of the reviewed data it is concluded that the ancient monogeneans with 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks were divided into two main lines, one retaining unhinged marginal hooks and the other evolving hinged marginal hooks. Both main lines have recent representatives at different marginal hook evolutionary capacity levels, i.e. monogeneans retaining a haptor with only marginal hooks. For the main line with hinged marginal hooks the name Articulon-choinea n. subclass is proposed. Members with 8 + 8 hinged marginal hooks only are here called Proanchorea n. superord. Monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks only are here called Ananchorea n. superord. and three new families are erected for its recent members: Anonchohapteridae n. fam., Acolpentronidae n. fam. and Anacanthoridae n. fam. (with 7 + 7, 8 + 8 and 9 + 9 unhinged marginal hooks, respectively). Except for the families of Articulonchoinea (e.g. Acanthocotylidae, Gyrodactylidae, Tetraonchoididae) Bychowsky's (1957) division of the Monogenea into the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea fits the proposed scheme, i.e. monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks form one old group, the Oligonchoinea, which have 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks, and the other group form the Polyonchoinea, which (with the exception of the Hexabothriidae) has a greater number (7 + 7, 8 + 8 or 9 + 9) of unhinged marginal hooks. It is proposed that both these names, Oligonchoinea (sensu mihi) and Polyonchoinea (sensu mihi), will be retained on one side and Articulonchoinea placed on the other side, which reflects the early monogenean evolution. Except for the members of Ananchorea [Polyonchoinea], all members of the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea have anchors, which imply that they are further evolved, i.e. have passed the 5 + 5 marginal hook evolutionary capacity level (Malmberg, 1986). There are two main types of anchors in the Monogenea: haptoral anchors, with anlages appearing in the haptor, and peduncular anchors, with anlages in the peduncle. There are two types of haptoral anchors: peripheral haptoral anchors, ontogenetically the oldest, and central haptoral anchors. Peduncular anchors, in turn, are ontogenetically younger than peripheral haptoral anchors. There may be two pairs of peduncular anchors: medial peduncular anchors, ontogentically the oldest, and lateral peduncular anchors. Only peduncular (not haptoral) anchors have anchor bars. Monogeneans with haptoral anchors are here called Mediohaptanchorea n. superord. and Laterohaptanchorea n. superord. or haptanchoreans. All oligonchoineans and the oldest polyonchoineans are haptanchoreans. Certain members of Calceostomatidae [Polyonchoinea] are the only monogeneans with both (peripheral) haptoral and peduncular anchors (one pair). These monogeneans are here called Mixanchorea n. superord. Polyonchoineans with peduncular anchors and unhinged marginal hooks are here called the Pedunculanchorea n. superord. The most primitive pedunculanchoreans have only one pair of peduncular anchors with an anchor bar, while the most advanced have both medial and lateral peduncular anchors; each pair having an anchor bar. Certain families of the Articulonchoinea, the Anchorea n. superord., also have peduncular anchors (parallel evolution): only one family, the Sundanonchidae n. fam., has both medial and lateral peduncular anchors, each anchor pair with an anchor bar. Evolutionary lines from different monogenean evolutionary capacity levels are discussed and a new system of classification for the Monogenea is proposed.In agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. EditorIn agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. Editor