Suppr超能文献

在二级卒中预防中,患者在治疗决策中使用正式和非正式知识源:定性研究。

The use of formal and informal knowledge sources in patients' treatment decisions in secondary stroke prevention: qualitative study.

机构信息

School of Health, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2013 Sep;16(3):e13-23. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00724.x. Epub 2011 Sep 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is robust empirical evidence to support clinical decision making in secondary stroke prevention after transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or recovered stroke. However, little attention has been paid to patients' utilization of this evidence in coming to decisions about their treatment choices.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the use of formal and informal knowledge by patients in making decisions about carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and medical treatment after TIA/recovered stroke.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Twenty participants were recruited from an outpatient vascular surgical assessment clinic in England. Ten were receiving medical treatment alone, and 10 were undergoing CEA after TIA or recovered stroke.

METHOD

Twenty-eight in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted. An iterative approach was used whereby emergent themes were further explored in later interviews. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and coded.

RESULTS

Participants gathered and utilized several types of knowledge in the process of making treatment decisions: Empirical knowledge (e.g. clinical trial findings); Pathophysiologic findings (e.g., results of clinical investigations); Experiential knowledge (e.g., personal experience of stroke); Goals and values (e.g., potential impact on family); System features (e.g., apparent urgency of treatment).

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to formal evidence, patients use other sources of informal or 'non-evidentiary' knowledge to support their decisions about treatment after TIA or recovered stroke. To enable evidence-based patient choice, health professionals need to appreciate the diverse types of evidence which patients use, to help them to access relevant and high-quality evidence, to balance evidence from different sources and to make choices which are congruent with their values and expectations.

摘要

背景

有大量确凿的经验证据支持短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)或中风恢复期后的二级预防中的临床决策。然而,对于患者在决定治疗选择时如何利用这些证据,关注甚少。

目的

探讨患者在决定 TIA/中风恢复期后行颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)和药物治疗时对正式和非正式知识的利用。

设置和参与者

从英国的一个门诊血管外科评估诊所招募了 20 名参与者。10 名仅接受药物治疗,10 名 TIA 或中风恢复期后行 CEA。

方法

进行了 28 次深入的定性访谈。采用迭代方法,即在后续访谈中进一步探讨新出现的主题。访谈进行了录音、转录和编码。

结果

参与者在做出治疗决策的过程中收集和利用了几种类型的知识:经验知识(例如临床试验结果);病理生理发现(例如临床检查结果);经验知识(例如中风个人经历);目标和价值观(例如对家庭的潜在影响);系统特征(例如治疗的明显紧迫性)。

结论

除了正式证据外,患者还使用其他来源的非正式或“非证据”知识来支持他们在 TIA 或中风恢复期后的治疗决策。为了实现基于证据的患者选择,卫生专业人员需要了解患者使用的各种类型的证据,以帮助他们获取相关和高质量的证据,平衡来自不同来源的证据,并做出符合其价值观和期望的选择。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

7
What counts as evidence in evidence-based practice?在循证实践中,什么可被视为证据?
J Adv Nurs. 2004 Jul;47(1):81-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03068.x.
8
9
Evidence-based health policy: context and utilisation.循证健康政策:背景与应用
Soc Sci Med. 2004 Jan;58(1):207-17. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(03)00166-7.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验