Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Jan 29.
Published in final edited form as: IISE Trans Healthc Syst Eng. 2018 Jan 29;8(1):72–82. doi: 10.1080/24725579.2017.1418769

Table 3.

OR and 95% CI for the associations between task acceptance, communication synchronicity, sender and receiver (n=83)*

Task Allocation Acceptance
Model I Model II Model III Model IV Model IV Model IV Model IV
Model fit (AIC) 95.717 107.24 100.36 90.63 92.431 95.038 86.702
Communication synchronicity
 Asynchronous Referent - - Referent Referent - Referent
 Synchronous 6.45 (2.42 to 18.29) - - 11.42 (0.53 to 4.31) 5.42 (1.88 to 16.77) - 7.63 (2.17 to 31.17)
Sender
 Physician - Referent - Referent - Referent Referent
 Nurse - 0.67 (0.19 to 2.22) - 0.30 (0.06 to 1.23) - 1.01 (0.19 to 5.28) 0.45 (0.07 to 2.68)
 MA - 0.11 (0.01 to 0.59) - 0.04 (0.00 to 0.27) - 0.13 (0.01 to 0.87) 0.04 (0.00 to 0.38)
 Unit clerk - 0.68 (0.18 to 2.45) - 0.29 (0.06 to 1.32) - 5.06 (0.80 to 48.15) 1.91 (0.23 to 20.01)
Receiver
 Physician - - Referent - Referent Referent Referent
 Nurse - - 3.50 (0.98 to 13.75) - 2.93 (0.73 to 12.77) 7.99 (1.31 to 76.02) 4.50 (0.64 to 45.15)
 MA - - 15.75 (2.34 to 319.10) - 9.21 (1.21 to 196.16) 31.41 (3.37 to 820.19) 14.08 (1.17 to 431.69)
 Unit clerk - - 6.50 (2.03 to 23.03) - 5.97 (1.70 to 23.48) 24.96 (4.63 to 209.19) 16.95 (2.56 to 164.82)

Notes: Results are presented as OR (95% CI)

*

Italicized values are significant at p<0.05.