• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

患者和全科医生在接受关于治疗风险和益处的详细信息后对服用预防心血管疾病药物的态度:一项定性研究。

Patient and general practitioner attitudes to taking medication to prevent cardiovascular disease after receiving detailed information on risks and benefits of treatment: a qualitative study.

机构信息

School of Health and Population Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.

出版信息

BMC Fam Pract. 2011 Jun 26;12:59. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-12-59.

DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-12-59
PMID:21703010
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3135546/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

There are now effective drugs to prevent cardiovascular disease and guidelines recommend their use. Patients do not always choose to accept preventive medication at levels of risk reduction recommended in guidelines. The purpose of the study was to identify and explore the attitudes of patients and general practitioners towards preventative medication for cardiovascular disease (CVD) after they have received information about it; to identify implications for practice and prescribing.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews with GPs and patients following presentation of in depth information about CVD risks and the absolute effects of medication.

SETTING

GP practices in Birmingham, United Kingdom.

RESULTS

In both populations: wide variation on attitudes to preventative medication; concerns about unnecessary drug taking & side effects; preferring to consider lifestyle changes first. In patient population: whatever their attitudes to medication were, the vast majority explained that they would ultimately do what their GP recommended; there was some misunderstanding of the distinction between curative and preventative medication. A common theme was the degree of trust in their doctors' judgement and recommendations, which contrasted with scepticism of the role of pharmaceutical companies and academics. Scepticism in guidelines was also common among doctors although many nevertheless recommended treatment for their patients

CONCLUSIONS

A guideline approach to prescribing preventative medication could be against the interests and preferences of the patient. GPs must take extra care to explain what preventative medication is and why it is recommended, attempt to discern preferences and make recommendations balancing these potentially conflicting concerns.

摘要

背景

目前已有预防心血管疾病的有效药物,且指南推荐使用这些药物。但患者接受的风险降低水平的预防药物并不总是按照指南建议选择。本研究的目的是确定并探讨患者和全科医生在接受心血管疾病(CVD)预防药物相关信息后,对其的态度;明确实践和处方的意义。

方法

对英国伯明翰的全科医生和患者进行深入的 CVD 风险和药物绝对效果信息介绍后的定性访谈。

设置

在全科医生的诊室。

结果

在这两个群体中:对预防药物的态度存在广泛差异;担心不必要的药物服用和副作用;更愿意首先考虑生活方式的改变。在患者群体中:无论他们对药物的态度如何,绝大多数人都表示最终会听从他们的医生的建议;他们对治疗药物和预防药物之间的区别存在一些误解。一个常见的主题是对医生判断和建议的信任程度,这与对制药公司和学术界角色的怀疑形成鲜明对比。医生对指南也持怀疑态度,但尽管如此,许多医生仍为患者推荐治疗。

结论

开预防药物的处方时,采用指南方法可能不符合患者的利益和偏好。全科医生必须格外注意解释预防药物是什么,以及为什么建议使用它,试图辨别偏好,并在这些潜在冲突的问题上提出建议。

相似文献

1
Patient and general practitioner attitudes to taking medication to prevent cardiovascular disease after receiving detailed information on risks and benefits of treatment: a qualitative study.患者和全科医生在接受关于治疗风险和益处的详细信息后对服用预防心血管疾病药物的态度:一项定性研究。
BMC Fam Pract. 2011 Jun 26;12:59. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-12-59.
2
How do general practitioners and patients make decisions about cardiovascular disease risk?全科医生和患者如何就心血管疾病风险做出决策?
Health Psychol. 2015 Mar;34(3):253-61. doi: 10.1037/hea0000122. Epub 2014 Aug 18.
3
Factors influencing general practitioners' decisions about cardiovascular disease risk reassessment: findings from experimental and interview studies.影响全科医生进行心血管疾病风险重新评估决策的因素:实验研究与访谈研究的结果
BMC Fam Pract. 2016 Aug 5;17:107. doi: 10.1186/s12875-016-0499-7.
4
Improving long-term adherence to statin therapy: a qualitative study of GPs' experiences in primary care.改善他汀类药物治疗的长期依从性:初级保健中全科医生经验的定性研究。
Br J Gen Pract. 2018 Jun;68(671):e401-e407. doi: 10.3399/bjgp18X696173. Epub 2018 Apr 23.
5
Implementation of evidence-based knowledge in general practice.循证医学知识在全科医疗中的应用。
Dan Med J. 2017 Dec;64(12).
6
Implementing cardiovascular disease prevention guidelines to translate evidence-based medicine and shared decision making into general practice: theory-based intervention development, qualitative piloting and quantitative feasibility.将心血管疾病预防指南付诸实践,将循证医学和共同决策转化为一般实践:基于理论的干预措施开发、定性试点和定量可行性。
Implement Sci. 2019 Aug 30;14(1):86. doi: 10.1186/s13012-019-0927-x.
7
Swedish general practitioners' attitudes towards treatment guidelines - a qualitative study.瑞典全科医生对治疗指南的态度——一项定性研究。
BMC Fam Pract. 2014 Dec 16;15:199. doi: 10.1186/s12875-014-0199-0.
8
Patient beliefs and attitudes to taking statins: systematic review of qualitative studies.患者对服用他汀类药物的信念和态度:定性研究的系统评价。
Br J Gen Pract. 2018 Jun;68(671):e408-e419. doi: 10.3399/bjgp18X696365.
9
Shared decision-making about cardiovascular disease medication in older people: a qualitative study of patient experiences in general practice.老年人心血管疾病药物治疗的共同决策:一般实践中患者体验的定性研究。
BMJ Open. 2019 Mar 20;9(3):e026342. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026342.
10
Danish citizens' perspectives on the preventive medication recommended after screen-detected cardiovascular disease: A qualitative study.丹麦公民对屏幕检测出心血管疾病后的预防药物的看法:一项定性研究。
Scand J Caring Sci. 2024 Sep;38(3):802-814. doi: 10.1111/scs.13274. Epub 2024 Jun 7.

引用本文的文献

1
CT Angiography, Healthy Lifestyle Behaviors, and Preventive Therapy: A Nested Substudy of the SCOT-HEART 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.CT血管造影、健康生活方式行为与预防性治疗:SCOT-HEART 2随机临床试验的一项嵌套子研究
JAMA Cardiol. 2025 Jun 18. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2025.1763.
2
Acceptability of fixed-dose combination treatments for hypertension in Kenya: A qualitative study using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.肯尼亚高血压固定剂量复方治疗的可接受性:一项基于可接受性理论框架的定性研究
PLOS Glob Public Health. 2025 Mar 18;5(3):e0003012. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003012. eCollection 2025.
3
Fostering active choice to empower behavioral change to reduce cardiovascular risk: A web-based randomized controlled trial.促进积极选择以推动行为改变从而降低心血管风险:一项基于网络的随机对照试验。
PLoS One. 2024 Aug 1;19(8):e0304897. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304897. eCollection 2024.
4
Professional beliefs of physicians and allied health professionals and their willingness to promote health in primary care: a cross-sectional survey.医生和辅助医疗专业人员的专业信念及其在初级保健中促进健康的意愿:一项横断面调查。
BMC Prim Care. 2024 May 27;25(1):188. doi: 10.1186/s12875-024-02412-6.
5
Perspectives of Community Nurses on Treatment Engagement of Persons with Severe Mental Illnesses (PwSMI): A Qualitative Study from South India.社区护士对重度精神疾病患者治疗参与度的看法:来自印度南部的一项定性研究
Indian J Psychol Med. 2024 Mar;46(2):131-138. doi: 10.1177/02537176231207986. Epub 2023 Dec 22.
6
Gender-Related Factors in Medication Adherence for Metabolic and Cardiovascular Health.代谢与心血管健康药物依从性中的性别相关因素
Metabolites. 2023 Oct 17;13(10):1087. doi: 10.3390/metabo13101087.
7
Examining the Impact of Polygenic Risk Information in Primary Care.探讨多基因风险信息在初级保健中的影响。
J Prim Care Community Health. 2023 Jan-Dec;14:21501319231151766. doi: 10.1177/21501319231151766.
8
The Effects of Single Pill Combinations on Adherence and Blood Pressure Control in Hypertensive Patients.单片复方制剂对高血压患者依从性和血压控制的影响
Mater Sociomed. 2022 Jun;34(2):130-135. doi: 10.5455/msm.2022.34.130-135.
9
Adherence to Antiplatelet Medications among Persistent and Non-Persistent Older Patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease.外周动脉疾病持续和非持续老年患者对抗血小板药物的依从性
Biomedicines. 2021 Nov 30;9(12):1800. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines9121800.
10
Evaluation of Frailty Syndrome and Adherence to Recommendations in Elderly Patients with Hypertension.老年高血压患者衰弱综合征评估及对建议的依从性
J Clin Med. 2021 Aug 24;10(17):3771. doi: 10.3390/jcm10173771.

本文引用的文献

1
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.为面临医疗治疗或筛查决策的人群提供的决策辅助工具。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jul 8(3):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub2.
2
Aspirin in the primary and secondary prevention of vascular disease: collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised trials.阿司匹林用于血管疾病的一级和二级预防:来自随机试验的个体参与者数据的协作荟萃分析
Lancet. 2009 May 30;373(9678):1849-60. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60503-1.
3
Use of blood pressure lowering drugs in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis of 147 randomised trials in the context of expectations from prospective epidemiological studies.降压药物在心血管疾病预防中的应用:基于前瞻性流行病学研究预期的147项随机试验的荟萃分析
BMJ. 2009 May 19;338:b1665. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b1665.
4
Blood cholesterol and vascular mortality by age, sex, and blood pressure: a meta-analysis of individual data from 61 prospective studies with 55,000 vascular deaths.按年龄、性别和血压分层的血胆固醇与血管性死亡率:对61项前瞻性研究中55000例血管性死亡的个体数据进行的荟萃分析
Lancet. 2007 Dec 1;370(9602):1829-39. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61778-4.
5
Patients' preferences shed light on the murky world of guideline-based medicine.患者的偏好揭示了基于指南的医学这一模糊领域的情况。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2007 Feb;13(1):154-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00701.x.
6
Primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases with statin therapy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.他汀类药物治疗对心血管疾病的一级预防:随机对照试验的荟萃分析
Arch Intern Med. 2006 Nov 27;166(21):2307-13. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.21.2307.
7
Multiple risk factor interventions for primary prevention of coronary heart disease.用于冠心病一级预防的多重危险因素干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Oct 18(4):CD001561. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001561.pub2.
8
The myth of agency and patient choice in health care? The case of drug treatments to prevent coronary disease.医疗保健中自主性与患者选择的神话?以预防冠心病的药物治疗为例。
Soc Sci Med. 2006 Nov;63(10):2698-701. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.07.008. Epub 2006 Aug 22.
9
Predictors of patients' preferences for treatments to prevent heart disease.患者对预防心脏病治疗方法偏好的预测因素。
Heart. 2006 Nov;92(11):1651-5. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2005.072405. Epub 2006 May 18.
10
Increased absenteeism from work among aware and treated hypertensive and hypercholesterolaemic patients.知晓并接受治疗的高血压和高胆固醇血症患者的工作缺勤率增加。
Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2006 Apr;13(2):261-7. doi: 10.1097/01.hjr.0000194420.62379.de.