Elwyn Glyn, Quinlan Casey, Mulley Albert, Agoritsas Thomas, Vandvik Per Olav, Guyatt Gordon
The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, 37 Dewey Field Road, Hanover, NH, 03755, USA.
The Mighty Mouth, Mighty Casey Media, 9101 Patterson Avenue Suite 57, Richmond, VA, 23229, USA.
BMC Med. 2015 Sep 1;13:199. doi: 10.1186/s12916-015-0436-y.
The ability to do online searches for health information has led to concerns that patients find the results confusing and that they often lead to expectations for treatments that have little supportive evidence. At the same time, the science of summarizing research evidence has advanced to the point where it is increasingly possible to quantify treatment tradeoffs and to describe the balance between harms and benefits for individual patients.
Trustworthy clinical practice guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations to health care practitioners based on assessments of study-level averages. In an effort to customize the use of evidence and ensure that choices are consistent with their personal preferences, tools for patients have been developed. Gradually, there is recognition that the audience for high quality evidence is much wider than merely health care professionals - and that there is a case to be made for creating tools that translate existing evidence into tools to help patients and clinicians work together to decide next steps. We observe two processes occurring: first, is the recognition that decision making in healthcare requires collaboration and deliberation, and second, to achieve this, we need tools designed to customize care at the level of individuals.
能够在线搜索健康信息引发了人们的担忧,即患者会觉得搜索结果令人困惑,而且这些结果往往会导致他们对几乎没有支持证据的治疗产生期望。与此同时,总结研究证据的科学已经发展到这样一个程度,即越来越有可能量化治疗的权衡,并描述个体患者的危害与益处之间的平衡。
可靠的临床实践指南基于对研究水平平均值的评估,为医疗从业者提供循证建议。为了定制证据的使用并确保选择符合个人偏好,已经开发了针对患者的工具。人们逐渐认识到,高质量证据的受众远比医疗专业人员广泛——而且有理由创建将现有证据转化为工具的工具,以帮助患者和临床医生共同决定下一步措施。我们观察到两个过程正在发生:第一,认识到医疗保健中的决策需要协作和审议;第二,为了实现这一点,我们需要设计用于在个体层面定制护理的工具。