患者报告结局测量指标(PROMs)如何支持临床医生与患者之间的沟通及患者护理?一项实在论综合分析。

How do patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) support clinician-patient communication and patient care? A realist synthesis.

作者信息

Greenhalgh Joanne, Gooding Kate, Gibbons Elizabeth, Dalkin Sonia, Wright Judy, Valderas Jose, Black Nick

机构信息

1School of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, Leeds, LS2 9JT England.

2Present address: Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA UK.

出版信息

J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2018 Sep 15;2:42. doi: 10.1186/s41687-018-0061-6. eCollection 2018 Dec.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In this paper, we report the findings of a realist synthesis that aimed to understand how and in what circumstances patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) support patient-clinician communication and subsequent care processes and outcomes in clinical care. We tested two overarching programme theories: (1) PROMs completion prompts a process of self-reflection and supports patients to raise issues with clinicians and (2) PROMs scores raise clinicians' awareness of patients' problems and prompts discussion and action. We examined how the structure of the PROM and care context shaped the ways in which PROMs support clinician-patient communication and subsequent care processes.

RESULTS

PROMs completion prompts patients to reflect on their health and gives them permission to raise issues with clinicians. However, clinicians found standardised PROMs completion during patient assessments sometimes constrained rather than supported communication. In response, clinicians adapted their use of PROMs to render them compatible with the ongoing management of patient relationships. Individualised PROMs supported dialogue by enabling the patient to tell their story. In oncology, PROMs completion outside of the consultation enabled clinicians to identify problematic symptoms when the PROM acted as a substitute rather than addition to the clinical encounter and when the PROM focused on symptoms and side effects, rather than health related quality of life (HRQoL). Patients did not always feel it was appropriate to discuss emotional, functional or HRQoL issues with doctors and doctors did not perceive this was within their remit.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper makes two important contributions to the literature. First, our findings show that PROMs completion is not a neutral act of information retrieval but can change how patients think about their condition. Second, our findings reveal that the ways in which clinicians use PROMs is shaped by their relationships with patients and professional roles and boundaries. Future research should examine how PROMs completion and feedback shapes and is influenced by the process of building relationships with patients, rather than just their impact on information exchange and decision making.

摘要

背景

在本文中,我们报告了一项实效综合分析的结果,该分析旨在了解患者报告结局测量指标(PROMs)如何以及在何种情况下支持患者与临床医生之间的沟通以及临床护理中后续的护理过程和结局。我们测试了两个总体项目理论:(1)完成PROMs会引发自我反思过程,并支持患者向临床医生提出问题;(2)PROMs评分会提高临床医生对患者问题的认识,并促使进行讨论和采取行动。我们研究了PROM的结构和护理背景如何塑造PROMs支持医患沟通及后续护理过程的方式。

结果

完成PROMs促使患者反思自身健康状况,并使他们有理由向临床医生提出问题。然而,临床医生发现在患者评估期间完成标准化的PROMs有时会限制而非支持沟通。作为回应,临床医生调整了他们对PROMs的使用方式,使其与对患者关系的持续管理相适应。个性化的PROMs通过让患者讲述自己的故事来支持对话。在肿瘤学中,当PROM作为临床会诊的替代而非补充,且PROM关注症状和副作用而非健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)时,在会诊之外完成PROMs能使临床医生识别出有问题的症状。患者并不总是觉得与医生讨论情绪、功能或HRQoL问题是合适的,而医生也不认为这属于他们的职责范围。

结论

本文对该文献做出了两项重要贡献。首先,我们的研究结果表明,完成PROMs并非是一种中立的信息检索行为,而是可以改变患者对自身病情的看法。其次,我们的研究结果揭示,临床医生使用PROMs的方式受到他们与患者的关系以及专业角色和界限的影响。未来的研究应考察完成PROMs及反馈如何塑造与患者建立关系的过程并受其影响,而不仅仅是其对信息交流和决策的影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2ee7/6153194/29e2b67239a1/41687_2018_61_Fig1_HTML.jpg

引用本文的文献

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