• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

全科医生对用于 2 型糖尿病患者共同决策的以患者为中心的治疗决策辅助工具的看法:一项混合方法研究。

Views of general practice staff about the use of a patient-oriented treatment decision aid in shared decision making for patients with type 2 diabetes: A mixed-methods study.

机构信息

Department of Clinical Pharmacy andPharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2018 Feb;21(1):64-74. doi: 10.1111/hex.12586. Epub 2017 Jun 21.

DOI:10.1111/hex.12586
PMID:28636186
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5750736/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Decision aids can be used to support shared decision making (SDM). A patient-oriented treatment decision aid (DA) was developed for type 2 diabetes but its use by general practice staff appeared to be limited.

OBJECTIVES

To explore views of practice staff towards SDM and the DA.

DESIGN

A mixed-methods study within the Dutch PORTDA-diab trial.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Included were 17 practices with staff members who were responsible for routine diabetes care and had worked with the DA, and 209 of their patients.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted focusing on applicability, usefulness and feasibility of the DA. Interviews were tape-recorded, transcribed verbatim and subjected to content analysis for identifying and classifying views. Patient-reported data about the use of the DA were collected. Associations between specific views and use of the DA were tested using Pearson point-biserial correlation.

RESULTS

The majority of practice staff expressed positive views towards SDM, which was associated with making more use of the DA. Most of the staff expressed that the DA stimulated a two-way conversation. By using the DA, several became aware of their paternalistic approach. Some staff experienced a conflict with the content of the DA, which was associated with making less use of the DA.

CONCLUSIONS

The DA was considered useful by practice staff to support SDM. A positive view towards SDM was a facilitator, whereas experiencing a conflict with the content of the DA was a barrier for making use of the DA.

摘要

背景

决策辅助工具可用于支持共同决策(SDM)。已经开发了一种针对 2 型糖尿病的以患者为中心的治疗决策辅助工具(DA),但全科医生的使用似乎有限。

目的

探讨实践人员对 SDM 和 DA 的看法。

设计

荷兰 PORTDA-diab 试验中的一项混合方法研究。

设置和参与者

包括 17 家实践,其工作人员负责常规糖尿病护理并使用过 DA,以及他们的 209 名患者。

方法

访谈重点关注 DA 的适用性、有用性和可行性。对访谈进行录音、逐字转录,并进行内容分析,以识别和分类观点。收集了患者关于使用 DA 的报告数据。使用 Pearson 点双列相关检验测试特定观点与 DA 使用之间的关联。

结果

大多数实践人员对 SDM 持积极态度,这与更频繁地使用 DA 相关。大多数工作人员表示,DA 激发了双向对话。通过使用 DA,一些人意识到了他们的家长式作风。一些工作人员对 DA 的内容感到冲突,这与较少使用 DA 相关。

结论

实践人员认为 DA 有助于支持 SDM。对 SDM 的积极看法是促进因素,而与 DA 内容发生冲突则是阻碍 DA 使用的因素。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0117/5750736/528699ec2d8e/HEX-21-64-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0117/5750736/33d1294be667/HEX-21-64-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0117/5750736/528699ec2d8e/HEX-21-64-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0117/5750736/33d1294be667/HEX-21-64-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0117/5750736/528699ec2d8e/HEX-21-64-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Views of general practice staff about the use of a patient-oriented treatment decision aid in shared decision making for patients with type 2 diabetes: A mixed-methods study.全科医生对用于 2 型糖尿病患者共同决策的以患者为中心的治疗决策辅助工具的看法:一项混合方法研究。
Health Expect. 2018 Feb;21(1):64-74. doi: 10.1111/hex.12586. Epub 2017 Jun 21.
2
Investigation of factors influencing the implementation of two shared decision-making interventions in contraceptive care: a qualitative interview study among clinical and administrative staff.调查影响避孕护理中两种共享决策干预措施实施的因素:一项针对临床和行政人员的定性访谈研究。
Implement Sci. 2019 Nov 9;14(1):95. doi: 10.1186/s13012-019-0941-z.
3
Beyond pros and cons - developing a patient decision aid to cultivate dialog to build relationships: insights from a qualitative study and decision aid development.超越利弊 - 开发患者决策辅助工具以培养对话建立关系:来自定性研究和决策辅助工具开发的见解。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2019 Sep 18;19(1):186. doi: 10.1186/s12911-019-0898-5.
4
Impact of an interprofessional shared decision-making and goal-setting decision aid for patients with diabetes on decisional conflict--study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.一项针对糖尿病患者的跨专业共同决策和目标设定决策辅助工具对决策冲突的影响——一项随机对照试验的研究方案
Trials. 2015 Jun 27;16:286. doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-0797-8.
5
Exploring Provider Reactions to Decision Aid Distribution and Shared Decision Making: Lessons from Two Specialties.探索医疗服务提供者对决策辅助工具分发及共同决策的反应:来自两个专业领域的经验教训。
Med Decis Making. 2017 Jan;37(1):113-126. doi: 10.1177/0272989X16671933. Epub 2016 Oct 6.
6
The Learning Curve for Shared Decision-making in Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis.症状性主动脉瓣狭窄的共享决策学习曲线。
JAMA Cardiol. 2020 Apr 1;5(4):442-448. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.5719.
7
PCI Choice: Cardiovascular clinicians' perceptions of shared decision making in stable coronary artery disease.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的选择:心血管临床医生对稳定型冠状动脉疾病共同决策的看法
Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Jun;100(6):1136-1143. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.01.010. Epub 2017 Jan 15.
8
Making sense of diabetes medication decisions: a mixed methods cluster randomized trial using a conversation aid intervention.理解糖尿病药物治疗决策:使用对话辅助干预的混合方法聚类随机试验。
Endocrine. 2022 Feb;75(2):377-391. doi: 10.1007/s12020-021-02861-4. Epub 2021 Sep 9.
9
Shared decision making for patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized trial in primary care.2 型糖尿病患者的共同决策:初级保健中的随机试验。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Aug 8;13:301. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-301.
10
Impact of a web-based treatment decision aid for early-stage prostate cancer on shared decision-making and health outcomes: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.基于网络的早期前列腺癌治疗决策辅助工具对共同决策和健康结局的影响:一项随机对照试验的研究方案
Trials. 2015 May 27;16:231. doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-0750-x.

引用本文的文献

1
Shared decision-making in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review of patients' preferences and healthcare providers' perspectives.2型糖尿病中的共同决策:对患者偏好和医疗服务提供者观点的系统评价
BMC Health Serv Res. 2025 Jan 7;25(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-12160-z.
2
Using an Integrated Framework to Investigate the Facilitators and Barriers of Health Information Technology Implementation in Noncommunicable Disease Management: Systematic Review.利用综合框架研究非传染性疾病管理中健康信息技术实施的促进因素和障碍:系统评价。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Jul 20;24(7):e37338. doi: 10.2196/37338.
3
Patient decision aids in clinical practice for people with diabetes: a scoping review.

本文引用的文献

1
Diabetes Self-management Education and Support in Type 2 Diabetes: A Joint Position Statement of the American Diabetes Association, the American Association of Diabetes Educators, and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.2型糖尿病的糖尿病自我管理教育与支持:美国糖尿病协会、美国糖尿病教育者协会以及营养与膳食学会的联合立场声明
Clin Diabetes. 2016 Apr;34(2):70-80. doi: 10.2337/diaclin.34.2.70.
2
Shared Decision-Making Models Acknowledging an Interprofessional Approach: A Theory Analysis to Inform Nursing Practice.承认跨专业方法的共同决策模型:为护理实践提供信息的理论分析
Res Theory Nurs Pract. 2016;30(1):26-43. doi: 10.1891/1541-6577.30.1.26.
3
糖尿病患者临床实践中的患者决策辅助工具:一项范围综述
Diabetol Int. 2020 Mar 13;11(4):344-359. doi: 10.1007/s13340-020-00429-7. eCollection 2020 Oct.
4
Effects of a Proactive Interdisciplinary Self-Management Program on Patient Self-Efficacy and Participation During Practice Nurse Consultations: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Type 2 Diabetes.一项积极的跨学科自我管理计划对实践护士会诊期间患者自我效能和参与度的影响:2型糖尿病的随机对照试验
J Clin Med Res. 2020 Feb;12(2):79-89. doi: 10.14740/jocmr3965. Epub 2020 Feb 1.
5
Active participation of patients with type 2 diabetes in consultations with their primary care practice nurses - what helps and what hinders: a qualitative study.2 型糖尿病患者积极参与与初级保健执业护士的咨询——有何帮助,有何阻碍:一项定性研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Nov 8;19(1):814. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4572-5.
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.
4
Decision aids that really promote shared decision making: the pace quickens.真正促进共同决策的决策辅助工具:步伐加快。
BMJ. 2015 Feb 10;350:g7624. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g7624.
5
Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2015: a patient-centred approach. Update to a position statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes.2015年2型糖尿病高血糖管理:以患者为中心的方法。美国糖尿病协会和欧洲糖尿病研究协会立场声明的更新版
Diabetologia. 2015 Mar;58(3):429-42. doi: 10.1007/s00125-014-3460-0. Epub 2015 Jan 13.
6
Decision aids, empowerment, and shared decision making.决策辅助工具、赋权与共同决策
BMJ. 2014 Sep 25;349:g5811. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g5811.
7
Effects of a patient oriented decision aid for prioritising treatment goals in diabetes: pragmatic randomised controlled trial.面向患者的决策辅助工具对糖尿病治疗目标优先级排序的影响:实用随机对照试验。
BMJ. 2014 Sep 25;349:g5651. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g5651.
8
Shared decision making in chronic care in the context of evidence based practice in nursing.基于循证护理实践的慢性病护理中的共同决策。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2015 Jan;52(1):393-402. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.06.012. Epub 2014 Jul 5.
9
Twelve myths about shared decision making.关于共同决策的十二个误区。
Patient Educ Couns. 2014 Sep;96(3):281-6. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2014.06.014. Epub 2014 Jul 3.
10
Impact of sociodemographic patient characteristics on the efficacy of decision AIDS: a patient-level meta-analysis of 7 randomized trials.社会人口学患者特征对决策辅助工具疗效的影响:7项随机试验的患者层面荟萃分析
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2014 May;7(3):360-7. doi: 10.1161/HCQ.0000000000000006. Epub 2014 May 13.