Department of Family Medicine, University of Marburg, Germany.
Patient Educ Couns. 2011 Feb;82(2):240-6. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.04.028. Epub 2010 Jun 12.
Although shared decision making (SDM) has become increasingly important in bioethical discussions and clinical practice, it is not clear in which treatment situations SDM is suitable. We address this question by investigating social norms on the appropriateness of SDM in different situations.
We conducted qualitative expert interviews with patients, general practitioners, and health administration and research professionals.
SDM was considered to be most important in severe illness and chronic condition. Furthermore, SDM was indicated to be required if there is more than one therapeutic option, especially if it is not clear which option is best. Interviewees classified end-of-life decisions and decisions about prevention as those that primarily should be made by informed patients. On the other hand a paternalistic decision was considered most appropriate in emergency situations and when the patient does not want to participate in decision making.
This study demonstrates that multiple situational factors and their interactions must be considered regarding the scope of SDM in medical consultation.
Research addressing this question will help physicians adjust their consultation style and allow implementations of SDM and decision aids to be tailored more appropriately to complex treatment situations.
尽管在生物伦理讨论和临床实践中,共同决策(SDM)变得越来越重要,但在哪些治疗情况下适合使用 SDM 尚不清楚。我们通过调查不同情况下社会规范对 SDM 适宜性的看法来回答这个问题。
我们对患者、全科医生、卫生行政和研究专业人员进行了定性专家访谈。
SDM 被认为在严重疾病和慢性病中最为重要。此外,如果有不止一种治疗选择,特别是如果不清楚哪种选择最好,则需要进行 SDM。受访者将临终决策和预防决策归类为那些主要应由知情患者做出的决策。另一方面,当患者不愿意参与决策时,在紧急情况下和家长式决策被认为是最合适的。
本研究表明,在医疗咨询中,必须考虑多个情境因素及其相互作用,以确定 SDM 的范围。
解决这个问题的研究将帮助医生调整他们的咨询风格,并允许 SDM 和决策辅助工具的实施更适当地针对复杂的治疗情况进行调整。