Failed appointments in an orthodontic clinic
Failed appointments in an orthodontic clinic
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.11.014
复制
发表时间：
2005-03-01
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
Prahl-Andersen, B
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bos, A;Hoogstraten, J;Prahl-Andersen, B
工作背景：本研究的目的是通过在荷兰的一家正畸诊所进行类似的随机对照试验，重新验证Reekie和Devlin（1998）的假设。据推测，提醒将减少不出勤率，提醒的形式将是无关紧要的。方法：所有患者的预约在正畸诊所在学术中心的牙科阿姆斯特丹在3周内被分为4组。三组在预约前一天通过电话、邮件或短信服务（SMS，一种用于向手机发送和接收短信的服务）收到提醒。对照组没有收到提醒。在后续研究中，通过电话采访了每组中的随机子样本。受试者被问到他们对收到提醒的感觉如何，以及他们更喜欢哪种提醒。结果：提醒会降低未出勤率的假设没有得到证实。此外，4种条件之间没有发现差异，表明提醒的形式无关紧要。然而，大多数受访者对收到提醒感到积极或非常积极。最受欢迎的是邮件提醒（56.3%），其次是电话提醒（26.0%）和短信提醒（17.7%）。不少于20%的受访者感到消极或非常消极的提醒，并认为他们是浪费时间和money.Conclusions：这一假设，提醒是有用的，在预防失败的约会没有得到证实。这项研究强调了复制研究的重要性。它表明，每一项研究结果，无论是基于证据的研究还是基于传统的研究，都应谨慎解释，并应在其他研究中复制，然后才能推广结果。
Background: The aim of this study was to retest the hypotheses of Reekie and Devlin (1998) by conducting a similar randomized controlled trial in an orthodontic clinic in the Netherlands. It was hypothesized that a reminder would reduce the failed attendance rate and that the form of the reminder would be irrelevant.Methods: All patients with appointments in the orthodontic clinic at the Academic Centre of Dentistry Amsterdam during a 3-week period were divided into 4 groups. Three groups received a reminder 1 day before the appointment, either by telephone, mail, or short message service (SMS, a service used to send and receive short text messages to and from cell phones). A control group did not receive a reminder. In a follow-up study, random subsamples in each group were interviewed by telephone. Subjects were asked how they felt about receiving a reminder and which reminder they preferred.Results: The hypothesis that a reminder would reduce the failed attendance rate was not confirmed. Also, no differences were found between the 4 conditions, indicating that the form of the reminder is irrelevant. However, most of the interviewed participants felt positive or very positive about receiving a reminder. There was a significant preference for a reminder by mail (56.3%), followed by a telephone reminder (26.0%) and a reminder by SMS (17.7%). No less than 20% of the interviewed participants felt negative or very negative about the reminders and considered them to be a waste of time and money.Conclusions: The hypothesis that reminders are useful in the prevention of failed appointments was not confirmed. This study underlines the importance of replication studies. It demonstrates that every research result, whether it is generated by evidence-based or tradition-based research, should be interpreted with care and should be replicated in other studies before the results can be generalized.