%0期刊文章%@ 1438-8871 %I JMIR出版物%V 24%卡塔尔世界杯8强波胆分析 N 9% P e35643% T聊天消息、语音呼叫或视频呼叫后的急诊和住院在日本使用远程医疗服务用户数据进行妇产科远程医疗:横断研究%A Sakakibara,Koichi %A Shigemi,Daisuke %A Toriumi,Rena %A Ota,Ai %A Michihata,Nobuaki %A Yasunaga,Hideo %+约翰霍普金斯大学彭博公共卫生学院卫生、行为和社会系，巴尔的摩北沃尔夫街615号，马里兰州，2205，美国，1 03 4405 9862，ksakaki1@jhmi.edu %K e - health %K妇科%K聊天消息%K移动健康%K移动健康%K产科%K安全%K远程健康%K远程医疗%K视频通话%K语音通话%D 2022 %7 23.9.2022 %9原始论文%J J医学互联网Res %G英语%X背景:在产科和妇科实践中，通过聊天消息、语音通话和视频通话的同步远程医疗服务已经越来越多地装备起来，以改善患者的医疗保健可及性和临床结果。然而，通信工具之间的临床结果差异仍然未知，特别是在安全性方面。目的:通过聊天、语音、视频等不同通信工具，比较远程医疗服务后急诊和住院的发生情况。方法:我们收集了2019年1月1日至2020年12月31日期间通过日本远程医疗咨询服务(Sanfujin-ka Online)咨询专业医生和助产士的妇女的产科和妇科问题的数据。结果为急诊或夜间住院。采用卡方检验和多因素logistic回归分析比较通过聊天信息、语音通话和视频通话接受远程医疗服务组的临床结果。结果:这项研究包括3635名参与者。参与者的平均年龄为31.4岁(SD 5.7岁)，最大年龄组为30-39岁(n=2154, 59.3%)。 The numbers (or proportions) of those who received telehealth services via chat message, voice calls, and video calls were 1584 (43.5%), 1947 (53.6%), and 104 (2.9%), respectively. The overall incidence of the outcome was 0.7% (26/3635), including 10 (0.3%) cases of chat message, 16 (0.5%) cases of voice calls, and no video calls. There were no emergency visits that happened due to inappropriate advice. No significant difference in the proportions of the outcomes was observed between the communication tools (P=.55). The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant differences in the outcome between those who used chat message and those who used voice calls (odds ratio 1.63, 95% CI 0.73-3.65). Conclusions: The communication tools of telehealth services in obstetrics and gynecology did not show a significant difference in terms of emergency visits or hospitalizations after using the service. %M 36149744 %R 10.2196/35643 %U //www.mybigtv.com/2022/9/e35643 %U https://doi.org/10.2196/35643 %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36149744