Suppr超能文献

改善全科医疗中焦虑症管理的干预措施:一项系统评价。

Interventions to improve management of anxiety disorders in general practice: a systematic review.

作者信息

Heideman Jantien, van Rijswijk Eric, van Lin Nieke, de Loos Sandra, Laurant Miranda, Wensing Michel, van de Lisdonk Eloy, Grol Richard

机构信息

Centre for Quality of Care Research (WOK) University Medical Centre Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Br J Gen Pract. 2005 Nov;55(520):867-74.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Anxiety disorders are common in general practice and are associated with several problems regarding recognition and management.

AIM

To systematically evaluate the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving recognition, diagnosis, and management of patients with anxiety disorders.

DESIGN OF STUDY

Systematic review.

METHOD

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and the Cochrane Clinical Trials' Register were searched up until 2003. Randomised controlled trials, controlled before/after trials, and interrupted time series for professional, organisational, financial, and regulatory interventions were eligible. Primary effect measures consisted of anxiety outcomes, diagnosis, prescription, and referral. Two reviewers independently made eligibility judgments: eight out of 563 articles were found to be eligible. Two reviewers participated independently in the quality assessment and data extraction process using a standardised form based on the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care checklist. Relative risks or standardised mean differences were calculated when possible.

RESULTS

Four professional interventions and three organisational interventions were examined. In general, the professional interventions seemed to increase recognition, referral, and prescription as well as improving anxiety outcomes. Two out of three organisational interventions showed a positive effect on anxiety outcomes. The one study that took prescription into account showed no effect.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of care for patients with anxiety can be improved. A combination of professional and organisational interventions in which an external expert is introduced seems to be most promising. Additional research is nevertheless necessary to determine the exact effects of such interventions using patient effect measures, economic evaluations, and feasibility studies.

摘要

背景

焦虑症在普通医疗实践中很常见,并且在识别和管理方面存在若干问题。

目的

系统评价旨在改善焦虑症患者识别、诊断和管理的干预措施的有效性。

研究设计

系统评价。

方法

检索截至2003年的MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsychINFO和Cochrane临床试验注册库。纳入针对专业、组织、财务和监管干预措施的随机对照试验、前后对照试验以及中断时间序列研究。主要疗效指标包括焦虑结局、诊断、处方和转诊。两名评价者独立进行纳入标准判断:在563篇文章中发现8篇符合标准。两名评价者使用基于有效医疗实践与组织核对清单的标准化表格独立参与质量评估和数据提取过程。尽可能计算相对风险或标准化均数差。

结果

审查了四项专业干预措施和三项组织干预措施。总体而言,专业干预措施似乎能提高识别率、转诊率和处方率,并改善焦虑结局。三项组织干预措施中有两项对焦虑结局显示出积极效果。唯一一项考虑了处方的研究未显示出效果。

结论

焦虑症患者的护理质量可以得到改善。引入外部专家的专业和组织干预措施相结合似乎最有前景。然而,仍需要进一步研究,以使用患者疗效指标、经济评估和可行性研究来确定此类干预措施的确切效果。

相似文献

5
Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions.心理健康问题患者的共同决策干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Nov 11;11(11):CD007297. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007297.pub3.
10

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验