Clancy C M, Cebul R D, Williams S V
Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Am J Med. 1988 Feb;84(2):283-8. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(88)90426-3.
In early 1983, all 1,280 faculty and resident physicians at one hospital who were eligible to be vaccinated against hepatitis B were divided randomly into three groups: Group 1 physicians received general information about the risks and benefits of alternative vaccine decisions; Group 2 physicians were additionally invited to provide personal information for an individualized decision analysis (12.6 percent responded); and Group 3 physicians, who served as controls, were not contacted. In one year's follow-up, 20 percent of physicians were screened for hepatitis B antibody or vaccinated. More Group 2 physicians whose decision analyses recommended screening or vaccination took these actions (39 percent) than any other group. Group assignment remained significantly associated with vaccine decisions after analyzing results by the "intention to treat" principle, and after adjusting for training status, exposure to blood and blood products, and pre-study intentions about the vaccine. Despite the low overall vaccine acceptance rate, it is concluded that individualized decision analysis can influence the clinical decisions taken by knowledgeable and interested patients.
1983年初,一家医院的1280名有资格接种乙肝疫苗的教职员工和住院医师被随机分为三组:第一组医生收到了关于替代疫苗决策的风险和益处的一般信息;第二组医生还被邀请提供个人信息以进行个体化决策分析(12.6%的人做出了回应);而作为对照组的第三组医生则未被联系。在一年的随访中,20%的医生接受了乙肝抗体筛查或接种了疫苗。决策分析建议进行筛查或接种疫苗的第二组医生中,采取这些行动的比例(39%)高于其他任何一组。按照“意向性分析”原则分析结果后,以及在对培训状况、接触血液和血液制品情况以及研究前对疫苗的意向进行调整后,分组情况仍然与疫苗决策显著相关。尽管总体疫苗接受率较低,但得出的结论是,个体化决策分析可以影响有知识且感兴趣的患者所做出的临床决策。