Suppr超能文献

种族和民族差异在卒中护理中的表现:美国经验:美国心脏协会/美国卒中协会向医疗保健专业人员的声明。

Racial-ethnic disparities in stroke care: the American experience: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association.

出版信息

Stroke. 2011 Jul;42(7):2091-116. doi: 10.1161/STR.0b013e3182213e24. Epub 2011 May 26.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Our goal is to describe the effect of race and ethnicity on stroke epidemiology, personal beliefs, access to care, response to treatment, and participation in clinical research. In addition, we seek to determine the state of knowledge on the main factors that may explain disparities in stroke care, with the goal of identifying gaps in knowledge to guide future research. The intended audience includes physicians, nurses, other healthcare professionals, and policy makers.

METHODS

Members of the writing group were appointed by the American Heart Association Stroke Council Scientific Statement Oversight Committee and represent different areas of expertise in relation to racial-ethnic disparities in stroke care. The writing group reviewed the relevant literature, with an emphasis on reports published since 1972. The statement was approved by the writing group; the statement underwent peer review, then was approved by the American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee.

RESULTS

There are limitations in the definitions of racial and ethnic categories currently in use. For the purpose of this statement, we used the racial categories defined by the US federal government: white, black or African American, Asian, American Indian/Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander. There are 2 ethnic categories: people of Hispanic/Latino origin or not of Hispanic/Latino origin. There are differences in the distribution of the burden of risk factors, stroke incidence and prevalence, and stroke mortality among different racial and ethnic groups. In addition, there are disparities in stroke care between minority groups compared with whites. These disparities include lack of awareness of stroke symptoms and signs and lack of knowledge about the need for urgent treatment and the causal role of risk factors. There are also differences in attitudes, beliefs, and compliance among minorities compared with whites. Differences in socioeconomic status and insurance coverage, mistrust of the healthcare system, the relatively limited number of providers who are members of minority groups, and system limitations may contribute to disparities in access to or quality of care, which in turn might result in different rates of stroke morbidity and mortality. Cultural and language barriers probably also contribute to some of these disparities. Minorities use emergency medical services systems less, are often delayed in arriving at the emergency department, have longer waiting times in the emergency department, and are less likely to receive thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. Although unmeasured factors may play a role in these delays, the presence of bias in the delivery of care cannot be excluded. Minorities have equal access to rehabilitation services, although they experience longer stays and have poorer functional status than whites. Minorities are inadequately treated with both primary and secondary stroke prevention strategies compared with whites. Sparse data exist on racial-ethnic disparities in access to surgical care after intracerebral hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage. Participation of minorities in clinical research is limited. Barriers to participation in clinical research include beliefs, lack of trust, and limited awareness. Race is a contentious topic in biomedical research because race is not proven to be a surrogate for genetic constitution.

CONCLUSIONS

There are limitations in the current definitions of race and ethnicity. Nevertheless, racial and ethnic disparities in stroke exist and include differences in the biological determinants of disease and disparities throughout the continuum of care, including access to and quality of care. Access to and participation in research is also limited among minority groups. Acknowledging the presence of disparities and understanding the factors that contribute to them are necessary first steps. More research is required to understand these differences and find solutions.

摘要

目的

我们旨在描述种族和民族对中风流行病学、个人信念、获得医疗服务的机会、治疗反应和参与临床研究的影响。此外,我们还寻求确定可能导致中风护理差异的主要因素的知识现状,旨在找出知识空白,以指导未来的研究。目标受众包括医生、护士、其他医疗保健专业人员和政策制定者。

方法

写作小组成员由美国心脏协会中风理事会科学声明监督委员会任命,代表与中风护理方面的种族和民族差异相关的不同专业领域。写作小组审查了相关文献,重点是自 1972 年以来发表的报告。该声明得到了写作小组的批准;声明经过同行评议,然后得到美国心脏协会科学咨询和协调委员会的批准。

结果

目前使用的种族和民族类别定义存在局限性。为了本声明的目的,我们使用了美国联邦政府定义的种族类别:白种人、黑种人或非裔美国人、亚洲人、美洲印第安人/阿拉斯加原住民和夏威夷原住民/其他太平洋岛民。有 2 个民族类别:西班牙裔/拉丁裔或非西班牙裔/拉丁裔。不同种族和民族群体的危险因素分布、中风发病率和患病率以及中风死亡率存在差异。此外,与白人相比,少数群体的中风护理存在差异。这些差异包括对中风症状和体征的认识不足,以及对紧急治疗和危险因素因果关系的认识不足。少数群体与白人相比,在态度、信仰和依从性方面也存在差异。少数群体与白人相比,在社会经济地位和保险覆盖范围、对医疗保健系统的不信任、少数民族成员数量相对较少的提供者以及系统限制方面可能存在差异,这可能导致获得或护理质量的差异,从而导致不同的中风发病率和死亡率。文化和语言障碍可能也是造成这些差异的部分原因。少数群体使用紧急医疗服务系统的比例较低,通常在到达急诊室时会延迟,在急诊室的等待时间较长,并且接受急性缺血性中风溶栓治疗的可能性较小。尽管未测量的因素可能在这些延迟中发挥作用,但不能排除护理提供中的偏见。少数群体接受康复服务的机会均等,尽管他们的住院时间较长,功能状态比白人差。与白人相比,少数群体在一级和二级中风预防策略的治疗上都不足。关于颅内出血和蛛网膜下腔出血后手术治疗的种族和民族差异的数据很少。少数群体参与临床研究的机会有限。参与临床研究的障碍包括信念、缺乏信任和意识有限。种族是生物医学研究中的一个有争议的话题,因为种族不能证明是遗传构成的替代物。

结论

目前种族和民族的定义存在局限性。尽管如此,中风方面仍存在种族和民族差异,包括疾病生物学决定因素以及从获得医疗服务到护理质量的各个方面的差异。少数群体获得和参与研究的机会也受到限制。承认存在差异并了解导致这些差异的因素是必要的第一步。需要进一步研究以了解这些差异并找到解决方案。

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