RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Telephone triage is used to optimise patient flow in emergency primary healthcare. Poor communication can lead to misunderstandings and compromise patient safety. To improve quality, a comprehensive understanding of factors affecting communication in medical call centres in primary care is needed. The aim of this review was to identify such factors and to describe how they affect communication during telephone triage. METHOD: A mixed-method systematic review was performed. In April 2021 and June 2023, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched for original studies describing communication during telephone triage in primary care medical call centres handling all types of medical problems from an unselected population. All studies were screened by two authors, blinded to each other's decisions. Disagreements were resolved by a third author. A framework was created by the thematic synthesis of the qualitative data and later used to synthesise the quantitative data. By using convergent integrated synthesis, the qualitative and quantitative findings were integrated. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess methodological limitations. RESULTS: Out of 5087 studies identified in the search, 62 studies were included, comprising 40 qualitative, 16 quantitative and six mixed-method studies. Thirteen factors were identified and organised into four main themes: organisational factors, factors related to the operator, factors related to the caller and factors in the interaction. Organisational factors included availability, working conditions and decision support systems. Factors related to the operator were knowledge and experience, personal qualities and communication strategies. Factors related to the caller were individual differences and the presented medical problem. Factors in the interaction were faceless communication, connection between operator and caller, third-person caller and communication barriers. The factors seem interrelated, with organisational factors affecting all parts of the conversation, and the operator's communication in particular. CONCLUSION: Many factors affect the structure, content, and flow of the conversation. The operators influence the communication directly but rely on the organisation to create a working environment that facilitates good communication. The results are mainly supported by qualitative studies and further studies are needed to explore and substantiate the relevance and effect of individual factors. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022298022.
Assuntos
Call Centers , Comunicação , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Telefone , Triagem , Triagem/métodos , HumanosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The safety of telemedicine in general and telephone triage (teletriage) safety in particular have been a focus of concern since the 1970s. Today, telehealth, now subsuming teletriage, has a basic structure and process intended to promote safety. However, inadequate telehealth systems may also compromise patient safety. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated rapid but uneven telehealth growth, both technologically and professionally. Within 5-10 years, the field will likely be more technologically advanced; however, these advances may still outpace professional standards. The need for an evidence-based system is crucial and urgent. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to explore ways that developed teletriage systems produce safe outcomes by examining key system components and questioning long-held assumptions. METHODS: We examined safety by performing a narrative review of the literature using key terms concerning patient safety in teletriage. In addition, we conducted system analysis of 2 typical formal systems, physician led and nurse led, in Israel and the United States, respectively, and evaluated those systems' respective approaches to safety. Additionally, we conducted in-depth interviews with representative physicians and 1 nurse using a qualitative approach. RESULTS: The review of literature indicated that research on various aspects of telehealth and teletriage safety is still sparse and of variable quality, producing conflicting and inconsistent results. Researchers, possibly unfamiliar with this complicated field, use an array of poorly defined terms and appear to design studies based on unfounded assumptions. The interviews with health care professionals demonstrated several challenges encountered during teletriage, mainly making diagnosis from a distance, treating unfamiliar patients, a stressful atmosphere, working alone, and technological difficulties. However, they reported using several measures that help them make accurate diagnoses and reasonable decisions, thus keeping patient safety, such as using their expertise and intuition, using structured protocols, and considering nonmedical factors and patient preferences (shared decision-making). CONCLUSIONS: Remote encounters about acute, worrisome symptoms are time sensitive, requiring decision-making under conditions of uncertainty and urgency. Patient safety and safe professional practice are extremely important in the field of teletriage, which has a high potential for error. This underregulated subspecialty lacks adequate development and substantive research on system safety. Research may commingle terminology and widely different, ill-defined groups of decision makers with wide variation in decision-making skills, clinical training, experience, and job qualifications, thereby confounding results. The rapid pace of telehealth's technological growth creates urgency in identifying safe systems to guide developers and clinicians about needed improvements.