Suppr超能文献

促进和限制医疗保健互动中共同决策的沟通实践:对话分析研究的系统评价。

Communication practices that encourage and constrain shared decision making in health-care encounters: Systematic review of conversation analytic research.

机构信息

University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2017 Dec;20(6):1228-1247. doi: 10.1111/hex.12557. Epub 2017 May 18.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is generally treated as good practice in health-care interactions. Conversation analytic research has yielded detailed findings about decision making in health-care encounters.

OBJECTIVE

To map decision making communication practices relevant to health-care outcomes in face-to-face interactions yielded by prior conversation analyses, and to examine their function in relation to SDM.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched nine electronic databases (last search November 2016) and our own and other academics' collections.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Published conversation analyses (no restriction on publication dates) using recordings of health-care encounters in English where the patient (and/or companion) was present and where the data and analysis focused on health/illness-related decision making.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We extracted study characteristics, aims, findings relating to communication practices, how these functioned in relation to SDM, and internal/external validity issues. We synthesised findings aggregatively.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight publications met the inclusion criteria. We sorted findings into 13 types of communication practices and organized these in relation to four elements of decision-making sequences: (i) broaching decision making; (ii) putting forward a course of action; (iii) committing or not (to the action put forward); and (iv) HCPs' responses to patients' resistance or withholding of commitment. Patients have limited opportunities to influence decision making. HCPs' practices may constrain or encourage this participation.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients, companions and HCPs together treat and undertake decision making as shared, though to varying degrees. Even for non-negotiable treatment trajectories, the spirit of SDM can be invoked through practices that encourage participation (eg by bringing the patient towards shared understanding of the decision's rationale).

摘要

背景

在医疗保健互动中,共享决策(SDM)通常被视为良好做法。会话分析研究已经产生了有关医疗保健遭遇中决策的详细发现。

目的

绘制先前会话分析产生的与面对面互动中的医疗保健结果相关的决策沟通实践,并研究其与 SDM 的关系。

搜索策略

我们搜索了九个电子数据库(最后一次搜索是在 2016 年 11 月)和我们自己以及其他学者的收藏。

纳入标准

使用英语录制的医疗保健互动记录发表的会话分析(对发表日期没有限制),其中患者(和/或同伴)在场,并且数据和分析重点是与健康/疾病相关的决策。

数据提取和综合

我们提取了研究特征、目的、与沟通实践相关的发现、这些发现与 SDM 的关系以及内部/外部有效性问题。我们综合了汇总发现。

结果

28 篇出版物符合纳入标准。我们将发现分为 13 种沟通实践,并将这些实践与决策序列的四个要素相关联:(i)提出决策;(ii)提出行动方案;(iii)承诺或不承诺(所提出的行动);和(iv)卫生保健提供者对患者的抵制或不承诺的反应。患者在影响决策方面的机会有限。卫生保健提供者的做法可能会限制或鼓励这种参与。

结论

患者、同伴和卫生保健提供者共同对待和进行决策,尽管程度不同。即使对于不可协商的治疗轨迹,也可以通过鼓励参与的实践来援引 SDM 的精神(例如,通过使患者对决策的理由达成共识)。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/788e/5690232/dcffa9686401/HEX-20-1228-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验