Suppr超能文献

简明图形价值史工具,用于重病决策。

Short Graphic Values History Tool for decision making during serious illness.

机构信息

Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada

Bridgepoint Active Healthcare, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2022 Dec;12(e6):e777-e784. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2018-001698. Epub 2019 Feb 6.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To develop and validate a values clarification tool, the Short Graphic Values History Tool (GVHT), designed to support person-centred decision making during serious illness.

METHODS

The development phase included input from experts and laypersons and assessed acceptability with patients/family members. In the validation phase, we recruited additional participants into a before-after study. Our primary validation hypothesis was that the tool would reduce scores on the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) at 1-2 weeks of follow-up. Our secondary validation hypotheses were that the tool would improve values clarity (reduce scores) more than other DCS subscales and increase engagement in advance care planning (ACP) processes related to identification and discussion of one's values.

RESULTS

In the development phase, the tool received positive overall ratings from 22 patients/family members in hospital (mean score 4.3; 1=very poor; 5=very good) and family practice (mean score 4.5) settings. In the validation phase, we enrolled 157 patients (mean age 71.8 years) from family practice, cancer clinic and hospital settings. After tool completion, decisional conflict decreased (-6.7 points, 95% CI -11.1 to -2.3, p=0.003; 0-100 scale; N=100), with the most improvement seen in the values clarity subscale (-10.0 points, 95% CI -17.3 to -2.7, p=0.008; N=100), and the ACP-Values process score increased (+0.4 points, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.6, p=0.001; 1-5 scale; N=61).

CONCLUSIONS

The Short GVHT is acceptable to end users and has some measure of validity. Further study to evaluate its impact on decision making during serious illness is warranted.

摘要

目的

开发并验证一种价值观澄清工具,即简短图形价值观史工具(GVHT),旨在支持重病患者的以患者为中心的决策。

方法

开发阶段包括专家和非专业人士的投入,并对患者/家属进行了可接受性评估。在验证阶段,我们招募了更多的参与者进行前后研究。我们的主要验证假设是,该工具将在 1-2 周的随访中降低决策冲突量表(DCS)的分数。我们的次要验证假设是,该工具将比其他 DCS 子量表更能提高价值观清晰度(降低分数),并增加与识别和讨论价值观相关的预先护理计划(ACP)流程的参与度。

结果

在开发阶段,该工具在医院(平均得分 4.3;1=非常差;5=非常好)和家庭实践(平均得分 4.5)环境中获得了 22 名患者/家属的积极总体评价。在验证阶段,我们从家庭实践、癌症诊所和医院环境中招募了 157 名患者(平均年龄 71.8 岁)。在工具完成后,决策冲突减少(-6.7 分,95%置信区间-11.1 至-2.3,p=0.003;0-100 分制;N=100),价值观清晰度子量表的改善最为明显(-10.0 分,95%置信区间-17.3 至-2.7,p=0.008;N=100),ACP-Values 流程评分增加(+0.4 分,95%置信区间 0.2 至 0.6,p=0.001;1-5 分制;N=61)。

结论

简短 GVHT 受终端用户的欢迎,具有一定的有效性。需要进一步研究以评估其在严重疾病期间决策的影响。

相似文献

1
Short Graphic Values History Tool for decision making during serious illness.简明图形价值史工具,用于重病决策。
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2022 Dec;12(e6):e777-e784. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2018-001698. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
9
Advance care planning for adults with heart failure.针对成年心力衰竭患者的预先护理计划。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Feb 27;2(2):CD013022. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013022.pub2.

引用本文的文献

5
Decision Making for Infants With Neurologic Conditions.神经疾病患儿的决策制定。
J Child Neurol. 2022 Mar;37(3):202-209. doi: 10.1177/08830738211056779. Epub 2022 Feb 8.

本文引用的文献

8
Clarifying values: an updated review.澄清价值观:最新综述。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S8. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S8. Epub 2013 Nov 29.

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