Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
O'Brien Institute of Public Health, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Implement Sci. 2020 Apr 7;15(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-00986-0.
Low-value care initiatives are rapidly growing; however, it is not clear how members of the public should be involved. The objective of this scoping review was to systematically examine the literature describing public involvement in initatives to reduce low-value care.
Evidence sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases from inception to November 26, 2019, grey literature (CADTH Tool), reference lists of included articles, and expert consultation. Citations were screened in duplicate and included if they referred to the public's perception and/or involvement in reducing low-value care. Public included patients or citizens without any advanced healthcare knowledge. Low-value care included medical tests or treatments that lack efficacy, have risks that exceed benefit, or are not cost-effective. Extracted data pertained to study characteristics, low-value practice, clinical setting, and level of public involvement (i.e., patient-clinician interaction, research, or policy-making).
The 218 included citations were predominantly original research (n = 138, 63%), published since 2010 (n = 192, 88%), originating from North America (n = 146, 67%). Most citations focused on patient engagement within the patient-clinician interaction (n = 156, 72%), using tools that included shared decision-making (n = 66, 42%) and patient-targeted educational materials (n = 72, 46%), and reported both reductions in low-value care and improved patient perceptions regarding low-value care. Fewer citations examined public involvement in low-value care policy-making (n = 33, 15%). Among citations that examined perspectives regarding public involvement in initiatives to reduce low-value care (n = 10, 5%), there was consistent support for the utility of tools applied within the patient-clinician interaction and less consistent support for involvement in policy-making.
Efforts examining public involvement in low-value care concentrate within the patient-clinician interaction, wherein patient-oriented educational materials and shared decision-making tools have been commonly studied and are associated with reductions in low-value care. This contrasts with inclusion of the public in low-value care policy decisions wherein tools to promote engagement are less well-developed and involvement not consistently viewed as valuable.
Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/6fsxm).
低价值医疗照护的相关倡议正在迅速发展;然而,公众应如何参与其中尚不清楚。本研究旨在系统地回顾文献,以描述公众参与减少低价值医疗照护的情况。
证据来源包括从建库至 2019 年 11 月 26 日的 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 CINAHL 数据库、灰色文献(CADTH Tool)、纳入文章的参考文献列表和专家咨询。对引用文献进行了重复筛选,如果引用文献涉及公众对减少低价值医疗照护的看法和/或参与情况,则将其纳入。公众包括没有先进医疗知识的患者或公民。低价值医疗照护包括疗效不佳、风险大于益处或不具有成本效益的医疗检查或治疗。提取的数据涉及研究特征、低价值实践、临床环境和公众参与程度(即医患互动、研究或决策制定)。
218 篇纳入的参考文献主要是原始研究(n = 138,63%),其中 2010 年以后发表的文献占 88%(n = 192),来自北美地区的文献占 67%(n = 146)。大多数文献侧重于医患互动中患者的参与情况(n = 156,72%),使用的工具包括共同决策(n = 66,42%)和针对患者的教育材料(n = 72,46%),并报告了低价值医疗照护的减少和患者对低价值医疗照护看法的改善。较少的文献研究了公众对低价值医疗照护政策制定的参与情况(n = 33,15%)。在审查公众对减少低价值医疗照护倡议参与意见的 10 篇文献中(n = 10,5%),一致支持在医患互动中应用工具的实用性,而对参与政策制定的支持则不一致。
评估公众参与低价值医疗照护的研究主要集中在医患互动方面,在此方面,以患者为导向的教育材料和共同决策工具已得到广泛研究,并与低价值医疗照护的减少相关。相比之下,公众参与低价值医疗照护政策决策的研究则较少,在此方面,促进参与的工具尚不成熟,公众的参与也未得到普遍认可。
开放科学框架(https://osf.io/6fsxm)。