Edwards Adrian, Unigwe Silvana, Elwyn Glyn, Hood Kerenza
Department of Primary Care, University of Wales Swansea Clinical School, Singleton Park, Swansea SA2 8PP.
BMJ. 2003 Sep 27;327(7417):703-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7417.703.
To assess the effects of different types of individualised risk communication for patients who are deciding whether to participate in screening.
Systematic review.
Specialist register of the Cochrane consumers and communication review group, scientific databases, and a manual follow up of references.
Studies were randomised controlled trials addressing decisions by patients whether or not to undergo screening and incorporating an intervention with an element of "individualised" risk communication-based on the individual's own risk factors for a condition (such as age or family history).
The principal outcome was uptake of screening tests; further cognitive and affective measures were also assessed to gauge informed decision making.
13 studies were included, 10 of which addressed mammography programmes. Individualised risk communication was associated with an increased uptake of screening tests (odds ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval 1.11 to 2.03). Few cognitive or affective outcomes were reported consistently, so it was not possible to conclude whether this increase in the uptake of tests was related to informed decision making by patients.
Individualised risk estimates may be effective for purposes of population health, but their effects on increasing uptake of screening programmes may not be interpretable as evidence of informed decision making by patients. Greater attention is required to ways of developing interventions for screening programmes that can achieve this.
评估不同类型的个体化风险沟通对正在决定是否参加筛查的患者的影响。
系统评价。
Cochrane消费者与沟通评价小组的专业注册库、科学数据库以及参考文献的手工追踪。
研究为随机对照试验,涉及患者是否接受筛查的决策,并纳入基于个体自身疾病风险因素(如年龄或家族史)的具有“个体化”风险沟通元素的干预措施。
主要结局是筛查检查的接受情况;还评估了进一步的认知和情感指标以衡量知情决策。
纳入13项研究,其中10项涉及乳腺X线摄影项目。个体化风险沟通与筛查检查接受率的增加相关(比值比1.5,95%置信区间1.11至2.03)。很少有认知或情感结局被一致报道,因此无法得出检查接受率的增加是否与患者的知情决策有关。
个体化风险评估对于人群健康目的可能是有效的,但其对增加筛查项目接受率的影响可能不能被解释为患者知情决策的证据。需要更加关注为筛查项目制定能够实现这一目标的干预措施的方法。