Suppr超能文献

共同决策与临床工作的细微差别:动态模型的概念、障碍和机会。

Shared decision-making and the nuances of clinical work: Concepts, barriers and opportunities for a dynamic model.

机构信息

Athena Institute, Faculty of Science, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

出版信息

J Eval Clin Pract. 2021 Aug;27(4):926-934. doi: 10.1111/jep.13507. Epub 2020 Nov 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) is considered the "final stage" that completes the implementation of evidence-based medicine. Yet, it is also considered the most neglected stage. SDM shifts the epistemological authority of medical knowledge to one that deliberately includes patients' values and preferences. Although this redefines the work of the clinical encounter, it remains unclear what a shared decision is and how it is practiced.

AIM

The aim of this paper is to describe how healthcare professionals manoeuvre the nuances of decision-making that shape SDM. We identify barriers to SDM and collect strategies to help healthcare professionals think beyond existing solution pathways and overcome barriers to SDM.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 68 healthcare professionals from psychiatry, internal medicine, intensive care medicine, obstetrics and orthopaedics and 15 patients.

RESULTS

This study found that healthcare professionals conceptualize SDM in different ways, which indicates a lack of consensus about its meaning. We identified five barriers that limit manoeuvring space for SDM and contest the feasibility of a uniform, normative SDM model. Three identified barriers: (a) "not all patients want new role," (b) "not all patients can adopt new role," and (c) "attitude," were linked to strategies focused on the knowledge, skills and attitudes of individual healthcare professionals. However, systemic barriers: (d) "prioritization of medical issues" and (e) "lack of time" render such individual-focused strategies insufficient.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for a more nuanced understanding of SDM as a "graded" framework that allows for flexibility in decision-making styles to accommodate patient's unique preferences and needs and to expand the manoeuvring space for decision-making. The strategies in this study show how our understanding of SDM as a process of multi-dyadic interactions that spatially exceed the consulting room offers new avenues to make SDM workable in contemporary medicine.

摘要

背景

共同决策(SDM)被认为是完成循证医学实施的“最后阶段”。然而,它也被认为是最被忽视的阶段。SDM 将医学知识的认识论权威转移到故意包括患者价值观和偏好的权威。尽管这重新定义了临床接触的工作,但仍不清楚什么是共同决策以及如何实践它。

目的

本文旨在描述医疗保健专业人员如何驾驭决策的细微差别,从而塑造 SDM。我们确定了 SDM 的障碍,并收集了帮助医疗保健专业人员超越现有解决方案途径并克服 SDM 障碍的策略。

方法

对来自精神病学、内科、重症监护医学、妇产科和骨科的 68 名医疗保健专业人员和 15 名患者进行了半结构化访谈。

结果

本研究发现,医疗保健专业人员以不同的方式概念化 SDM,这表明他们对其含义缺乏共识。我们确定了五个限制 SDM 机动空间的障碍,并对统一的规范性 SDM 模型的可行性提出了质疑。三个确定的障碍:(a)“并非所有患者都希望扮演新角色”、(b)“并非所有患者都能扮演新角色”和(c)“态度”,与专注于个人医疗保健专业人员的知识、技能和态度的策略相关。然而,系统障碍:(d)“医疗问题的优先排序”和(e)“缺乏时间”使得这种以个人为中心的策略不足。

结论

需要更细致地理解 SDM 作为一个“分级”框架,该框架允许在决策风格上具有灵活性,以适应患者独特的偏好和需求,并扩大决策的机动空间。本研究中的策略表明,我们将 SDM 理解为一种多对多互动的过程,其空间超越了咨询室,为使 SDM 在当代医学中可行提供了新途径。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1a21/8359199/a1faeb44b675/JEP-27-926-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验