Suppr超能文献

“恰当的”诊断检测:借助循证医学和共同决策支持诊断

"Appropriate" diagnostic testing: supporting diagnostics with evidence-based medicine and shared decision making.

作者信息

Polaris Julian J Z, Katz Jeffrey N

机构信息

Yale Law School, 127 Wall St,, New Haven, CT, USA.

出版信息

BMC Res Notes. 2014 Dec 16;7:922. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-7-922.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based medicine is an important approach to avoiding care that is unlikely to benefit patients in both the treatment and the diagnostic context. The medical evidence alone may not determine the most appropriate care decision. Patient interests are best served when the advantages and risks of a diagnostic test are viewed through the lens of the patient's values. That is, the paradigm of evidence-based medicine should be complemented by the paradigm of shared decision making.

ANALYSIS

Diagnostic testing may offer physiological and psychological benefits. Clinicians should also discuss the potential harms, however, which may be physiological (e.g. radiation or scarring), psychological (e.g. anxiety), and financial (e.g. cost-sharing burdens). All three of these concerns are compounded by the risk of false positives or incidental findings that are not serious, but which require decisions about further testing or treatment.

CONCLUSION

We suggest that patient-centered decision making around diagnostic testing involves a two-step inquiry:(1) Is the test medically appropriate? Does the available evidence documenting short- and long-term risk and benefits support the test for its intended use, given the patient's characteristics and symptoms?(2) Is the test appropriate for this patient? Has the provider initiated a conversation about tradeoffs that helps the patient evaluate whether the balance of risks and benefits is consonant with the patient's own values and preferences? Potential benefits and harms to consider include the physiological, the psychological, and the financial.

摘要

背景

循证医学是一种重要的方法,可避免在治疗和诊断过程中采用对患者不太可能有益的医疗措施。仅医学证据可能无法决定最合适的医疗决策。当通过患者价值观的视角来审视诊断检查的利弊时,患者的利益能得到最佳保障。也就是说,循证医学范式应辅以共同决策范式。

分析

诊断检查可能带来生理和心理益处。然而,临床医生也应讨论潜在危害,这些危害可能是生理方面的(如辐射或瘢痕形成)、心理方面的(如焦虑)以及经济方面的(如费用分担负担)。假阳性或偶然发现的风险会使这三方面的担忧加剧,这些发现虽不严重,但需要就进一步检查或治疗做出决策。

结论

我们建议围绕诊断检查进行以患者为中心的决策包括两个步骤的询问:(1)该检查在医学上是否合适?鉴于患者的特征和症状,现有记录短期和长期风险及益处的证据是否支持该检查用于其预期用途?(2)该检查对这位患者是否合适?医疗服务提供者是否已展开关于权衡取舍的对话,以帮助患者评估风险与益处的平衡是否符合患者自身的价值观和偏好?需要考虑的潜在益处和危害包括生理、心理和经济方面的。

相似文献

4
Shared decision making in endocrinology: present and future directions.内分泌学中的共同决策:现状与未来方向。
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016 Aug;4(8):706-716. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(15)00468-4. Epub 2016 Feb 23.
5
How contextual issues can distort shared decision making.背景因素如何扭曲共同决策。
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2016 Dec;118-119:17-23. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2016.10.002. Epub 2016 Nov 3.
7
Whose choice is it? Shared decision making in nephrology care.这是谁的选择?肾脏病护理中的共同决策。
Semin Dial. 2013 Mar-Apr;26(2):169-74. doi: 10.1111/sdi.12056. Epub 2013 Feb 22.
10
[The patient's role in evidence-based medicine].[患者在循证医学中的角色]
J Chir (Paris). 2009 Dec;146(6):537-44. doi: 10.1016/j.jchir.2009.10.016. Epub 2009 Nov 12.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

4
First, do no (financial) harm.首先,(在财务方面)切勿造成伤害。
JAMA. 2013 Aug 14;310(6):577-8. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.7516.
6
A piece of my mind. Mind the outcomes.一吐为快。留意结果。
JAMA. 2013 Jan 2;309(1):39-40. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.153826.
7
Preceding the procedure: medical devices and shared decision making.手术前:医疗设备与共同决策
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013 Jan;65(1):148-51. doi: 10.1002/acr.21826.
9
Overdiagnosis in cancer.癌症过度诊断。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 May 5;102(9):605-13. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djq099. Epub 2010 Apr 22.

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