Bouaud Jacques, Séroussi Brigitte
AP-HP, STIM, Paris, France.
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2011;2011:125-34. Epub 2011 Oct 22.
In 2002, Haynes et al. founded a prescriptive model of evidence-based medicine based on the patient's clinical state, her preferences, and research evidence, clinical expertise synthesizing the other three components. Revisiting this model of medical decision making, we propose a descriptive model introducing clinicians' preferences and formalize four reasons of non-compliance with clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). The approach has been applied to breast cancer management decisions taken by multidisciplinary staff meetings (MSMs) at the Tenon hospital, Paris, France, while using a clinical decision support system (CDSS): OncoDoc2. 1,889 MSM decisions have been recorded [February 2007-October 2009]. The compliance rate with CPGs was measured at 91.0%. Non-compliant decisions are mainly "MSM choices" (39.1%) and "particular cases" (34.9%). "Practice evolution" and "patient choices" are less frequent (12.4% and 11.2%). Even with a CDSS, a 100% compliance rate cannot be reached because particular cases fall outside CPGs and borderline cases need to be interpreted by clinicians.
2002年,海恩斯等人基于患者的临床状态、偏好以及研究证据,创立了一种循证医学的规范模型,临床专业知识则综合了其他三个组成部分。在重新审视这种医疗决策模型时,我们提出了一种描述性模型,引入了临床医生的偏好,并将不遵守临床实践指南(CPG)的四个原因形式化。该方法已应用于法国巴黎特农医院多学科 staff meetings(MSMs)做出的乳腺癌管理决策,同时使用了临床决策支持系统(CDSS):OncoDoc2。记录了1889项MSM决策[2007年2月至2009年10月]。CPG的遵守率为91.0%。不遵守的决策主要是“MSM选择”(39.1%)和“特殊情况”(34.9%)。“实践演变”和“患者选择”较少见(分别为12.4%和11.2%)。即使有CDSS,也无法达到100%的遵守率,因为特殊情况不属于CPG范围,边缘情况需要临床医生进行解释。 (注:原文中“multidisciplinary staff meetings”直译为“多学科工作人员会议”,这里根据语境意译为“多学科会议”更合适;“staff”未翻译出来可能是原文存在错误或不完整表述,根据语境推测这里应该是想说多学科会议相关内容,故整体翻译尽量贴近语境意思。)