Probst Marc A, Kanzaria Hemal K, Schoenfeld Elizabeth M, Menchine Michael D, Breslin Maggie, Walsh Cheryl, Melnick Edward R, Hess Erik P
Department of Emergency Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, CA.
Ann Emerg Med. 2017 Nov;70(5):688-695. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.03.063. Epub 2017 May 27.
Shared decisionmaking has been proposed as a method to promote active engagement of patients in emergency care decisions. Despite the recent attention shared decisionmaking has received in the emergency medicine community, including being the topic of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference, misconceptions remain in regard to the precise meaning of the term, the process, and the conditions under which it is most likely to be valuable. With the help of a patient representative and an interaction designer, we developed a simple framework to illustrate how shared decisionmaking should be approached in clinical practice. We believe it should be the preferred or default approach to decisionmaking, except in clinical situations in which 3 factors interfere. These 3 factors are lack of clinical uncertainty or equipoise, patient decisionmaking ability, and time, all of which can render shared decisionmaking infeasible. Clinical equipoise refers to scenarios in which there are 2 or more medically reasonable management options. Patient decisionmaking ability refers to a patient's capacity and willingness to participate in his or her emergency care decisions. Time refers to the acuity of the clinical situation (which may require immediate action) and the time that the clinician has to devote to the shared decisionmaking conversation. In scenarios in which there is only one medically reasonable management option, informed consent is indicated, with compassionate persuasion used as appropriate. If time or patient capacity is lacking, physician-directed decisionmaking will occur. With this framework as the foundation, we discuss the process of shared decisionmaking and how it can be used in practice. Finally, we highlight 5 common misconceptions in regard to shared decisionmaking in the ED. With an improved understanding of shared decisionmaking, this approach should be used to facilitate the provision of high-quality, patient-centered emergency care.
共同决策已被提议作为一种促进患者积极参与急诊护理决策的方法。尽管最近共同决策在急诊医学界受到了关注,包括成为2016年学术急诊医学共识会议的主题,但对于该术语的确切含义、过程以及最有可能具有价值的条件仍存在误解。在患者代表和交互设计师的帮助下,我们开发了一个简单的框架来说明在临床实践中应如何进行共同决策。我们认为,除了存在三个因素干扰的临床情况外,它应该是决策的首选或默认方法。这三个因素是缺乏临床不确定性或 equipoise、患者的决策能力和时间,所有这些都可能使共同决策变得不可行。临床equipoise是指存在两种或更多医学上合理的管理选择的情况。患者决策能力是指患者参与其急诊护理决策的能力和意愿。时间是指临床情况的紧急程度(可能需要立即采取行动)以及临床医生必须用于共同决策对话的时间。在只有一种医学上合理的管理选择的情况下,应进行知情同意,并在适当的时候使用富有同情心的劝说。如果缺乏时间或患者能力,则将进行医生主导的决策。以这个框架为基础,我们讨论共同决策的过程以及它在实践中如何使用。最后,我们强调了关于急诊科共同决策的五个常见误解。随着对共同决策的理解得到改善,这种方法应用于促进提供高质量的、以患者为中心的急诊护理。