Suppr超能文献

确立患者决策辅助工具的有效性:关键构建和测量工具。

Establishing the effectiveness of patient decision aids: key constructs and measurement instruments.

出版信息

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S12. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S12. Epub 2013 Nov 29.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Establishing the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDA) requires evidence that PtDAs improve the quality of the decision-making process and the quality of the choice made, or decision quality. The aim of this paper is to review the theoretical and empirical evidence for PtDA effectiveness and discuss emerging practical and research issues in the measurement of effectiveness.

METHODS

This updated overview incorporates: a) an examination of the instruments used to measure five key decision-making process constructs (i.e., recognize decision, feel informed about options and outcomes, feel clear about goals and preferences, discuss goals and preferences with health care provider, and be involved in decisions) and decision quality constructs (i.e., knowledge, realistic expectations, values-choice agreement) within the 86 trials in the Cochrane review; and b) a summary of the 2011 Cochrane Collaboration's review of PtDAs for these key constructs. Data on the constructs and instruments used were extracted independently by two authors from the 86 trials and any disagreements were resolved by discussion, with adjudication by a third party where required.

RESULTS

The 86 studies provide considerable evidence that PtDAs improve the decision-making process and decision quality. A majority of the studies (76/86; 88%) measured at least one of the key decision-making process or decision quality constructs. Seventeen different measurement instruments were used to measure decision-making process constructs, but no single instrument covered all five constructs. The Decisional Conflict Scale was most commonly used (n = 47), followed by the Control Preference Scale (n = 9). Many studies reported one or more constructs of decision quality, including knowledge (n = 59), realistic expectation of risks and benefits (n = 21), and values-choice agreement (n = 13). There was considerable variability in how values-choice agreement was defined and determined. No study reported on all key decision-making process and decision quality constructs.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of PtDA effectiveness in improving the quality of the decision-making process and decision quality is strong and growing. There is not, however, consensus or standardization of measurement for either the decision-making process or decision quality. Additional work is needed to develop and evaluate measurement instruments and further explore theoretical issues to advance future research on PtDA effectiveness.

摘要

背景

为了确定患者决策辅助工具(PtDA)的有效性,需要证明这些工具能够改善决策过程的质量和决策的质量,即决策质量。本文的目的是回顾 PtDA 有效性的理论和经验证据,并讨论在测量有效性方面出现的新的实际和研究问题。

方法

本综述更新了以下内容:a)对在 Cochrane 综述中 86 项试验中用于测量五个关键决策过程结构(即识别决策、了解选项和结果、明确目标和偏好、与医疗保健提供者讨论目标和偏好以及参与决策)和决策质量结构(即知识、现实期望、价值-选择一致)的工具进行了检查;b)总结了 2011 年 Cochrane 协作组对这些关键结构的 PtDA 评价。两位作者独立从 86 项试验中提取了有关结构和工具的数据,如果存在分歧,则通过讨论解决,如果需要,则由第三方裁决。

结果

86 项研究提供了大量证据,证明 PtDA 能够改善决策过程和决策质量。大多数研究(76/86;88%)至少测量了一个关键决策过程或决策质量结构。用于测量决策过程结构的测量工具多达 17 种,但没有一种工具涵盖所有五个结构。决策冲突量表(n = 47)最常用,其次是控制偏好量表(n = 9)。许多研究报告了一个或多个决策质量结构,包括知识(n = 59)、对风险和收益的现实期望(n = 21)和价值-选择一致(n = 13)。如何定义和确定价值-选择一致存在很大的差异。没有研究报告了所有关键决策过程和决策质量结构。

结论

PtDA 改善决策过程质量和决策质量的有效性证据是强有力的,并在不断增加。然而,无论是决策过程还是决策质量,都没有共识或标准化的测量方法。需要进一步开展工作来开发和评估测量工具,并进一步探讨理论问题,以推进未来对 PtDA 有效性的研究。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

7
Measurement of shared decision making - a review of instruments.共同决策的测量——工具综述
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2011;105(4):313-24. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2011.04.012. Epub 2011 May 4.

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