癌症互助社区提问清单评估。
Evaluation of question-listing at the Cancer Support Community.
机构信息
University of California, San Francisco, 3333 California Street, Suite 265, San Francisco, CA 94118 USA.
出版信息
Transl Behav Med. 2013 Jun;3(2):162-71. doi: 10.1007/s13142-012-0186-8.
Abstract
The Cancer Support Community (CSC) provides psychosocial support to people facing cancer in community settings. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the compatibility, effectiveness, and fidelity of the Situation-Choices-Objectives-People-Evaluation-Decisions (SCOPED) question-listing intervention at three CSC sites. Between August 2008 and August 2011, the Program Director at each CSC site implemented question-listing, while measuring patient distress, anxiety, and self-efficacy before and after each intervention. We analyzed the quantitative results using unadjusted statistical tests and reviewed qualitative comments by patients and the case notes of Program Directors to assess compatibility and fidelity. Program Directors implemented question-listing with 77 blood cancer patients. Patients reported decreased distress (p = 0.009) and anxiety (p = 0.005) and increased self-efficacy (p < 0.001). Patients and Program Directors endorsed the intervention as compatible with CSC's mission and approach and feasible to implement with high fidelity. CSC effectively translated SCOPED question-listing into practice in the context of its community-based psychosocial support services at three sites.
摘要
癌症支持社区（CSC）在社区环境中为面临癌症的人提供社会心理支持。本研究的目的是在三个 CSC 地点评估情境-选择-目标-人员-评估-决策（SCOPED）问题清单干预的兼容性、有效性和保真度。在 2008 年 8 月至 2011 年 8 月期间，每个 CSC 地点的项目主任实施了问题清单，同时在每次干预前后测量患者的痛苦、焦虑和自我效能感。我们使用未调整的统计检验分析了定量结果，并审查了患者的定性意见和项目主任的病例记录，以评估兼容性和保真度。项目主任对 77 名血液癌患者实施了问题清单。患者报告的痛苦减轻（p = 0.009），焦虑减轻（p = 0.005），自我效能感增加（p < 0.001）。患者和项目主任认为该干预措施与 CSC 的使命和方法一致，并且在高度保真度的情况下实施是可行的。CSC 在其三个地点的基于社区的社会心理支持服务背景下，成功地将 SCOPED 问题清单转化为实践。
相似文献
1
Evaluation of question-listing at the Cancer Support Community.癌症互助社区提问清单评估。
Transl Behav Med. 2013 Jun;3(2):162-71. doi: 10.1007/s13142-012-0186-8.
2
The Effects of Coaching Patients to List Questions Before Visiting Cancer Specialists: Retrospective Evaluation of Visit Preparation in a Rural, Underserved Setting.指导患者在就诊癌症专科医生前列出问题的效果：对农村医疗服务不足地区就诊准备情况的回顾性评估
J Particip Med. 2017 Aug 22;9(1):e15. doi: 10.2196/jopm.8949.
3
Implementation of a Psychoeducational Program for Cancer Survivors and Family Caregivers at a Cancer Support Community Affiliate: A Pilot Effectiveness Study.癌症支持社区分支机构针对癌症幸存者及其家庭照顾者实施心理教育项目：一项试点效果研究。
Cancer Nurs. 2016 May-Jun;39(3):169-80. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000311.
4
Promoting and supporting self-management for adults living in the community with physical chronic illness: A systematic review of the effectiveness and meaningfulness of the patient-practitioner encounter.促进和支持社区中患有慢性身体疾病的成年人进行自我管理：对医患互动的有效性和意义的系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(13):492-582. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907130-00001.
5
Effects of the Community Score Card approach on reproductive health service-related outcomes in Malawi.社区评分卡方法对马拉维生殖健康服务相关结局的影响。
PLoS One. 2020 May 19;15(5):e0232868. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232868. eCollection 2020.
6
The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.综合护理路径在医疗环境中对成人和儿童的有效性：一项系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(3):80-129. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907030-00001.
7
Interventions for involving older patients with multi-morbidity in decision-making during primary care consultations.在初级保健会诊期间让患有多种疾病的老年患者参与决策的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 28;2019(10):CD013124. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013124.pub2.
8
Evaluation and facilitation of intervention fidelity in community exercise programs through an adaptation of the TIDier framework.通过改编 TIDier 框架评估和促进社区锻炼计划的干预一致性。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Jan 30;20(1):68. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-4919-y.
9
Effectiveness of interventions that assist caregivers to support people with dementia living in the community: a systematic review.干预措施对帮助照顾者支持社区中痴呆症患者的有效性：系统评价。
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2008 Jun;6(2):137-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2008.00090.x.
10
The involvement of early stage breast cancer patients during oncology consultations in Italy: a multi-centred, randomized controlled trial of a question prompt sheet versus question listing.早期乳腺癌患者在意大利肿瘤咨询中的参与情况：一项问题提示表与问题清单的多中心随机对照试验。
BMJ Open. 2017 Aug 11;7(8):e015079. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015079.
引用本文的文献
1
How Are Qualitative Methods Used in Implementation Science Research? Results From a Systematic Scoping Review.定性方法如何用于实施科学研究？一项系统综述的结果
Implement Res Pract. 2025 Aug 28;6:26334895251367470. doi: 10.1177/26334895251367470. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
2
Controlled trial of decision support for men with early-stage prostate cancer: brief research report of effects on patient knowledge.早期前列腺癌男性决策支持的对照试验：对患者知识影响的简要研究报告
Front Urol. 2023 May 17;3:1127089. doi: 10.3389/fruro.2023.1127089. eCollection 2023.
3
The Impact of Cancer on Mental Health and the Importance of Supportive Services.癌症对心理健康的影响及支持性服务的重要性。
Galen Med J. 2024 Feb 26;13:e3327. doi: 10.31661/gmj.v13i.3327. eCollection 2024.
4
The Effects of Coaching Patients to List Questions Before Visiting Cancer Specialists: Retrospective Evaluation of Visit Preparation in a Rural, Underserved Setting.指导患者在就诊癌症专科医生前列出问题的效果：对农村医疗服务不足地区就诊准备情况的回顾性评估
J Particip Med. 2017 Aug 22;9(1):e15. doi: 10.2196/jopm.8949.
5
Understanding how and under what circumstances decision coaching works for people making healthcare decisions: a realist review.了解决策辅导如何以及在何种情况下对做出医疗保健决策的人起作用：一个现实主义的综述。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2022 Oct 8;22(1):265. doi: 10.1186/s12911-022-02007-0.
6
Evaluation of the "3 Good Questions" program for shared decision-making in pediatric medicine: a feasibility study.评估“3个好问题”项目在儿科医学共同决策中的应用：一项可行性研究。
Eur J Pediatr. 2021 Apr;180(4):1235-1242. doi: 10.1007/s00431-020-03868-1. Epub 2020 Nov 9.
7
An education intervention to improve decision making and health literacy among older Australians: a randomised controlled trial.一项旨在提高澳大利亚老年人决策能力和健康素养的教育干预措施：一项随机对照试验。
BMC Geriatr. 2019 May 7;19(1):129. doi: 10.1186/s12877-019-1143-x.
8
An education intervention to improve health literacy and decision making about supporting self-care among older Australians: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.一项旨在提高澳大利亚老年人健康素养及自我护理支持决策能力的教育干预措施：一项随机对照试验的研究方案
Trials. 2017 Sep 26;18(1):441. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2182-2.
9
Can consumers learn to ask three questions to improve shared decision making? A feasibility study of the ASK (AskShareKnow) Patient-Clinician Communication Model(®) intervention in a primary health-care setting.消费者能否学会提出三个问题以改善共同决策？在初级卫生保健环境中对ASK（询问、分享、知晓）医患沟通模型（®）干预措施的可行性研究。
Health Expect. 2016 Oct;19(5):1160-8. doi: 10.1111/hex.12409. Epub 2015 Sep 14.
10
Office-Based Tools and Primary Care Visit Communication, Length, and Preventive Service Delivery.基于办公室的工具与初级保健就诊沟通、时长及预防服务提供
Health Serv Res. 2016 Apr;51(2):728-45. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12348. Epub 2015 Aug 7.
本文引用的文献
1
Testing the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of a 'decision navigation' intervention for early stage prostate cancer patients in Scotland--a randomised controlled trial.在苏格兰对早期前列腺癌患者进行“决策导航”干预的可行性、可接受性和有效性测试——一项随机对照试验。
Psychooncology. 2013 May;22(5):1017-24. doi: 10.1002/pon.3093. Epub 2012 May 9.
2
Authoritarian physicians and patients' fear of being labeled 'difficult' among key obstacles to shared decision making.权威型医生和患者担心被贴上“难对付”的标签，这是阻碍共同决策的关键因素。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2012 May;31(5):1030-8. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0576.
3
Implementing patient question-prompt lists into routine cancer care.将患者问题清单纳入常规癌症护理。
Patient Educ Couns. 2012 Feb;86(2):252-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.04.020. Epub 2011 Jul 7.
4
Expanding the reach of decision and communication aids in a breast care center: a quality improvement study.扩大乳腺保健中心决策和沟通辅助工具的使用范围：一项质量改进研究。
Patient Educ Couns. 2011 May;83(2):234-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.07.003. Epub 2010 Aug 9.
5
The dissemination and implementation of evidence-based psychological treatments. A review of current efforts.基于证据的心理治疗的传播和实施。 当前努力的回顾。
Am Psychol. 2010 Feb-Mar;65(2):73-84. doi: 10.1037/a0018121.
6
Implementing decision and communication aids to facilitate patient-centered care in breast cancer: a case study.实施决策和沟通辅助工具，以促进乳腺癌患者为中心的护理：案例研究。
Patient Educ Couns. 2009 Dec;77(3):360-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.09.012. Epub 2009 Oct 21.
7
Promoting health communication between the community-dwelling well-elderly and pharmacists: the Ask Me 3 program.促进社区健康老年人与药剂师之间的健康沟通：“问我三件事”项目。
J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2008 Nov-Dec;48(6):784-92. doi: 10.1331/JAPhA.2008.07073.
8
Monitoring the implementation of Consultation Planning, Recording, and Summarizing in a breast care center.监测乳腺护理中心会诊计划制定、记录及总结的实施情况。
Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Dec;73(3):536-43. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.037. Epub 2008 Aug 28.
9
Training community resource center and clinic personnel to prompt patients in listing questions for doctors: follow-up interviews about barriers and facilitators to the implementation of consultation planning.培训社区资源中心和诊所人员，以促使患者为医生列出问题：关于实施咨询计划的障碍和促进因素的随访访谈。
Implement Sci. 2008 Jan 31;3:6. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-3-6.
10
Ask Me 3: improving communication in a Hispanic pediatric outpatient practice.“问我三件事”：改善西班牙裔儿科门诊的沟通情况
Am J Health Behav. 2007 Sep-Oct;31 Suppl 1:S115-21. doi: 10.5555/ajhb.2007.31.supp.S115.
Zotero 插件