Öz
Aim: Today, the impact of technological changes accelerating in all areas of human life is also reflected in the health sector. In a sustainable health system, health/medical technologies are important for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment process and rehabilitation of patients. This research was conducted to determine the level of advanced technology use of physicians working in hospitals in a province.
Method: The research was conducted on physicians (n=313) working in universities, public and private hospitals. Personal Information Form and Physicians' Advanced Technology Usage Opinions form were used to collect data. Data were evaluated using frequency, mean, minimum and maximum values, standard deviation, Mann Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis.
Results: The mean age of the physicians was 36.22±10.02. 57.5% of the participants are male, 40.6% have 1-5 years of service and 11 years or more. Physicians' Advanced Technology Usage Views total score was found to be 77.16±12.62(34-102). Opinion score of physicians working in surgical departments compared to physicians working in internal departments, physicians working in public hospitals compared to physicians working in private hospitals, physicians with academic titles as research assistants, physicians with 11 years or more working time in their current institution, using advanced technology and being aware of the problems that technology will bring. was found to be significantly higher than the mean.
Conclusion: It was determined that the positive opinions of the physicians towards the use of advanced technology were moderate. In line with this result, it is thought that it is important to determine the appropriate methods to use and evaluate technology in treatment, as well as to prevent preventive medicine practices from being pushed into the background with the spread of advanced technology, and to prevent the structuring of medical education in a way that will train technology-dependent physicians.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- 1. Koçkaya G. Tatar M. (Ed.). Health Technology Assessment in Medical Devices (WHO Medical device technical series). World Health Organization Publications (Health Economics and Policy Association) 2013.
- 2. who.int [Internet]. World Health Organization: Association Of Health Technology Online Resources. [Avaible Date: 05.07.2020]. Avaible from: https://www.who.int/health-technology-assessment/about/healthtechnology/en/
- 3. Kırılmaz H, Kırılmaz Kılıç S. Benefits of Empirical Ethics Studies in Ethical Dilemmas in Health Care. Human and Human 2014;1(1):35-44
- 4. Efyy V, et al. Digital health: meeting the ethical and policy challenges. Swiss Med Wkly 2018; 148(3):1-9
- 5. Ataç A, Kurt E, Yurdakul SE. An Overview to Ethical Problems in Telemedicine Technology. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2013;103(26):116–121
- 6. İzgi C. Personal health data in the context of the concept of privacy. Turkish Journal of Bioethics 2014;1(1):25-37.
- 7. Brall C, Schröder P, Maeckelberge E. Ethical aspects of digital health from a justice point of view. European Journal of Public Health 2019;29(3):18-22.
- 8. Avaner E. Fair Sharing of Advanced Technology Medical Devices and Limited Resources Example of Magnetic Resonance(MR) and Computerized Tomographic(CT) Devices. Turkish Journal of Bioethics 2019;6(3):100-108.
- 9. Sungur C. Unnecessary Use of Medical Imaging Services and Solution Suggestions Against It. Journal of Economic and Administrative Units of Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University 2018.
- 10. Sargutan AE. Health Technology Management. Hacettepe Health Administration Magazine 2005;8(1):113-144.
- 11. Gülcemal E, Keklik B. An Investigation On Factors Affecting The Confidence of Patients to Physicians: A Research In Isparta. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Social Sciences Institute 2018;8(14):64-87.
- 12. Cengiz İ, Küçükay A. Medical Malpractics, Psychological Dimensions Of Medical Malpractice and Physician’s Legal Responsibility. TAAD 2019;10(37):107-131.
- 13. Özer Ö, ve ark. Malpractise. Dicle Medical Journal 2015;42(3):394-397.
- 14. Tuncay İ, Uçan V. Malpractice in orthopaedics and traumatology. Turkish Orthopedics and Traumatology Association Association Journal 2020;19:55-61.
- 15. Sezer B, Onan A, Elçin M. Information and Communication Techonogies in Continuing Medical Education. Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Educ-Special Topics 2016;1(3):1-6.
- 16. Satıcı Ö, Akkuş Z, Alp A. Investigation of attitudes regarding technology in teaching staff members of Medical Faculty by CHAID analysis. Dicle Med J 2009;36(4):267-274.
- 17. Zayim N, Yıldırım S, Saka O. Instructional Technology in Medical Education. Medical Informatics Turkey Proceedings 2005;39-45.
- 18. Parlak Börü Ş. Civil Liability Arsing From Robotic Surgeries. InULR 2019;10(2):758-775.
- 19. Clendenin BR, Conlon HA, Burns C. Overuse of diagnostic imaging for work-related injuries. Workplace health & safety 2017:65(2):54-56.
- 20. Usluoğulları FH, Tıplamaz S, Yaycı N. Robotic surgery and malpractice. Turk J Urol 2017; 43(4): 425-428.
- 21. Bayat AH. Medical History. İstanbul: Traditional Medicine Association; 2010.
- 22. Bulut F, Civaner MM. Modern medicine is losing its humanistic essence: “Patients no more, but diseases” is the new motto now. Turkish Journal of Bioethics 2016;3(2):66-73.
- 23. Aktürk FC. Regard to In Vitro Fertiliziation Treatment in Turkish Society. (Masters Thesis) Afyon Kocatepe University Institute of Health Sciences 2006.
- 24. Akpınar A. Ethics in Using Genetic Information: Attitudes and Preferences of Physicians and Testees. (Doctoral Thesis). Kocaeli University Institute of Health Sciences 2010.
Öz
Amaç: Günümüzde insan hayatının her alanında hızlanan teknolojik değişimlerin etkisi sağlık sektörüne de yansımış durumdadır. Sürdürülebilir bir sağlık sisteminde hastalıkların önlenmesi, tanısı, tedavi süreci ve hastaların rehabilitasyonu için sağlık/tıbbi teknolojileri önem arz etmektedir. Bu araştırma, bir ildeki hastanelerde çalışan hekimlerin ileri teknoloji kullanım düzeyinin belirlenmesi amacıyla yapılmıştır.
Yöntem: Araştırma üniversite, devlet ve özel hastanede çalışan hekimler (n=313) üzerinde yapılmıştır. Verilerin toplanmasında Kişisel Bilgi Formu ve Hekimlerin İleri Teknoloji Kullanım Görüşleri formu kullanılmıştır. Veriler frekans, ortalama, minimum ve maksimum değerler, standart sapma, Mann Whitney U testi, Kruskal-Wallis kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir.
Bulgular: Hekimlerin yaş ortalaması 36.22±10.02’dir. Katılımcıların %57.5’i erkek, % 40.6’sı 1-5 ve 11 yıl ve üzerinde hizmet süresine sahiptir. Hekimlerin İleri Teknoloji Kullanım Görüşleri toplam puan ortalaması 77.16±12.62(34-102) olarak bulunmuştur. Cerrahi bölümlerde çalışan hekimlerin dahili bölümlerde çalışan hekimlere göre, kamu hastanesinde çalışan hekimlerin özel hastanede çalışan hekimlere göre, akademik ünvanı araştırma görevlisi olan hekimlerin, şu andaki kurumunda çalışma süresi 11 yıl ve üzeri olan hekimlerin ileri teknoloji kullanımına ve teknolojinin getireceği sorunların farkında olunduğuna ilişkin görüş puan ortalaması anlamlı düzeyde daha yüksek bulunmuştur.
Sonuç: Hekimlerin ileri teknoloji kullanımına yönelik olumlu görüşlerinin orta düzeyde olduğu belirlenmiştir. Bu sonuç doğrultusunda, teknolojiyi tedavide kullanmak ve değerlendirmek için uygun yöntemlerin belirlenmesinin önem arz etmesinin yanı sıra ileri teknolojinin yaygınlaşması ile koruyucu hekimlik uygulamalarının ikinci plana itilmesinin önlenmesi, tıp eğitiminin teknoloji bağımlı hekimler yetiştirecek biçimde yapılanmasının önüne geçilmesi büyük önem taşıyacağı düşünülmektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Hekim, İleri Teknoloji, Tıp
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- 1. Koçkaya G. Tatar M. (Ed.). Health Technology Assessment in Medical Devices (WHO Medical device technical series). World Health Organization Publications (Health Economics and Policy Association) 2013.
- 2. who.int [Internet]. World Health Organization: Association Of Health Technology Online Resources. [Avaible Date: 05.07.2020]. Avaible from: https://www.who.int/health-technology-assessment/about/healthtechnology/en/
- 3. Kırılmaz H, Kırılmaz Kılıç S. Benefits of Empirical Ethics Studies in Ethical Dilemmas in Health Care. Human and Human 2014;1(1):35-44
- 4. Efyy V, et al. Digital health: meeting the ethical and policy challenges. Swiss Med Wkly 2018; 148(3):1-9
- 5. Ataç A, Kurt E, Yurdakul SE. An Overview to Ethical Problems in Telemedicine Technology. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2013;103(26):116–121
- 6. İzgi C. Personal health data in the context of the concept of privacy. Turkish Journal of Bioethics 2014;1(1):25-37.
- 7. Brall C, Schröder P, Maeckelberge E. Ethical aspects of digital health from a justice point of view. European Journal of Public Health 2019;29(3):18-22.
- 8. Avaner E. Fair Sharing of Advanced Technology Medical Devices and Limited Resources Example of Magnetic Resonance(MR) and Computerized Tomographic(CT) Devices. Turkish Journal of Bioethics 2019;6(3):100-108.
- 9. Sungur C. Unnecessary Use of Medical Imaging Services and Solution Suggestions Against It. Journal of Economic and Administrative Units of Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University 2018.
- 10. Sargutan AE. Health Technology Management. Hacettepe Health Administration Magazine 2005;8(1):113-144.
- 11. Gülcemal E, Keklik B. An Investigation On Factors Affecting The Confidence of Patients to Physicians: A Research In Isparta. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Social Sciences Institute 2018;8(14):64-87.
- 12. Cengiz İ, Küçükay A. Medical Malpractics, Psychological Dimensions Of Medical Malpractice and Physician’s Legal Responsibility. TAAD 2019;10(37):107-131.
- 13. Özer Ö, ve ark. Malpractise. Dicle Medical Journal 2015;42(3):394-397.
- 14. Tuncay İ, Uçan V. Malpractice in orthopaedics and traumatology. Turkish Orthopedics and Traumatology Association Association Journal 2020;19:55-61.
- 15. Sezer B, Onan A, Elçin M. Information and Communication Techonogies in Continuing Medical Education. Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Educ-Special Topics 2016;1(3):1-6.
- 16. Satıcı Ö, Akkuş Z, Alp A. Investigation of attitudes regarding technology in teaching staff members of Medical Faculty by CHAID analysis. Dicle Med J 2009;36(4):267-274.
- 17. Zayim N, Yıldırım S, Saka O. Instructional Technology in Medical Education. Medical Informatics Turkey Proceedings 2005;39-45.
- 18. Parlak Börü Ş. Civil Liability Arsing From Robotic Surgeries. InULR 2019;10(2):758-775.
- 19. Clendenin BR, Conlon HA, Burns C. Overuse of diagnostic imaging for work-related injuries. Workplace health & safety 2017:65(2):54-56.
- 20. Usluoğulları FH, Tıplamaz S, Yaycı N. Robotic surgery and malpractice. Turk J Urol 2017; 43(4): 425-428.
- 21. Bayat AH. Medical History. İstanbul: Traditional Medicine Association; 2010.
- 22. Bulut F, Civaner MM. Modern medicine is losing its humanistic essence: “Patients no more, but diseases” is the new motto now. Turkish Journal of Bioethics 2016;3(2):66-73.
- 23. Aktürk FC. Regard to In Vitro Fertiliziation Treatment in Turkish Society. (Masters Thesis) Afyon Kocatepe University Institute of Health Sciences 2006.
- 24. Akpınar A. Ethics in Using Genetic Information: Attitudes and Preferences of Physicians and Testees. (Doctoral Thesis). Kocaeli University Institute of Health Sciences 2010.
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | Türkçe |
|---|---|
| Konular | Klinik Tıp Bilimleri |
| Bölüm | Araştırma Makalesi |
| Yazarlar | |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 24 Ocak 2022 |
| Gönderilme Tarihi | 9 Ekim 2021 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2022 Cilt: 12 Sayı: 1 |
Kaynak Göster
Bu Dergi Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ile lisanslanmıştır.
Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi’nin süreli bilimsel yayınıdır. Kaynak gösterilmeden kullanılamaz. Makalelerin sorumlulukları yazarlara aittir
Kapak
Ayşegül Tuğuz
İlter Uzel’in “Dioskorides ve Öğrencisi” adlı eserinden
Adres
Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Tıp Tarihi ve Etik Anabilim Dalı Çiftlikköy Kampüsü
Yenişehir/ Mersin