Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026
[Use of a digital health navigator in the emergency department: experiences and acceptance among patients and physicians].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schwenke Maria, Samtlebe Pascal, Homann Susann, Knöchelmann Anja
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The increasing use of emergency departments (EDs) for low-acuity cases leads to growing challenges for hospitals. Since 2023, a digital patient navigator (DGL) has been implemented in the ED of the University Hospital Halle (Saale). The AI-based decision support system provides an initial assessment based on a symptom-based self-anamnesis and recommends appropriate care pathways; the collected data are also available to medical staff for consultation. This study examines patients' user experiences and evaluations as well as physicians' acceptance and use of the DGL results.
METHODS: In an exploratory convergent mixed-methods study, 82 patients classified in Manchester Triage Levels 4 or 5 were surveyed using the UEQ‑S and eHEALS instruments (August 2025 to January 2026). A further eight physicians were interviewed and analyzed using structured qualitative content analysis.
RESULTS: Both groups were generally open to the usage of the DGL. Patients rated comprehensibility (61%), design (54%), and data security (52%) mostly positively, while the symptom assessment was criticized. Unstable internet connections and a lack of technical equipment made usage difficult. Physicians expressed concerns regarding validity and reliability. An integration into workflows was not established. Patients saw potential in the initial orientation, while physicians saw potentials in (post-)triage and decisions regarding waiting times, information structuring, and overcoming language barriers. Time constraints and the patients' health limitations and impairments limited the use in the ED.
DISCUSSION: Critical to the implementation of the DGL was systemic fitting rather than individual acceptance. Technical barriers need to be addressed; better information and flexible data collection were deficits that hindered the sustained integration into clinical workflows. This should be the focus of future research.
METHODS: In an exploratory convergent mixed-methods study, 82 patients classified in Manchester Triage Levels 4 or 5 were surveyed using the UEQ‑S and eHEALS instruments (August 2025 to January 2026). A further eight physicians were interviewed and analyzed using structured qualitative content analysis.
RESULTS: Both groups were generally open to the usage of the DGL. Patients rated comprehensibility (61%), design (54%), and data security (52%) mostly positively, while the symptom assessment was criticized. Unstable internet connections and a lack of technical equipment made usage difficult. Physicians expressed concerns regarding validity and reliability. An integration into workflows was not established. Patients saw potential in the initial orientation, while physicians saw potentials in (post-)triage and decisions regarding waiting times, information structuring, and overcoming language barriers. Time constraints and the patients' health limitations and impairments limited the use in the ED.
DISCUSSION: Critical to the implementation of the DGL was systemic fitting rather than individual acceptance. Technical barriers need to be addressed; better information and flexible data collection were deficits that hindered the sustained integration into clinical workflows. This should be the focus of future research.