Suppr超能文献

一项支持重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者机械通气共同决策的决策辅助工具(共同知情):可行性研究

A Decision Aid to Support Shared Decision Making About Mechanical Ventilation in Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients (InformedTogether): Feasibility Study.

作者信息

Basile Melissa, Andrews Johanna, Jacome Sonia, Zhang Meng, Kozikowski Andrzej, Hajizadeh Negin

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Northwell Health, Manhasset, NY, United States.

出版信息

J Particip Med. 2018 Apr-Jun;10(2):e7. doi: 10.2196/jopm.9877. Epub 2018 May 14.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients are often unprepared to make decisions about accepting intubation for respiratory failure. We developed a Web-based decision aid, InformedTogether, to facilitate severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients' preparation for decision making about whether to accept invasive mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure.

OBJECTIVE

We describe feasibility testing of the InformedTogether decision aid.

METHODS

Mixed methods, pre- and postintervention feasibility study in outpatient pulmonary and geriatric clinics. Clinicians used InformedTogether with severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients. Patient-participants completed pre- and postassessments about InformedTogether use. The outcomes measured were the following: feasibility/acceptability, communication (Combined Outcome Measure for Risk Communication [COMRADE], Medical Communication Competency Scale [MCCS], Observing Patient Involvement [OPTION] scales), and effectiveness of InformedTogether on changing patients' knowledge, Decisional Conflict Scale, and motivation.

RESULTS

We enrolled 11 clinicians and 38 Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients at six sites. Feasibility/acceptability: Clinicians and patients gave positive responses to acceptability questions (mean 74.1/89 max [SD 7.24] and mean 59.63/61 [SD 4.49], respectively). Communication: 96% of clinicians stated InformedTogether improved communication (modified MCCS mean 44.54/49 [SD 2.97]; mean OPTION score 32.03/48 [SD 9.27]; mean COMRADE Satisfaction 4.31/5.0 [SD 0.58]; and COMRADE Confidence 4.18/5.0 [SD 0.56]). Preference: Eighty percent of patients discussed preferences with their surrogates by 1-month. Effectiveness: Knowledge scores increased significantly after using InformedTogether (mean difference 3.61 [SD 3. 44], =.001) and Decisional Conflict decreased (mean difference Decisional Conflict Scale pre/post -13.76 [SD 20.39], =.006). Motivation increased after viewing the decision aid.

CONCLUSIONS

InformedTogether supports high-quality communication and shared decision making among Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients, clinicians, and surrogates. The increased knowledge and opportunity to deliberate and discuss treatment choices after using InformedTogether should lead to improved decision making at the time of critical illness.

摘要

背景

重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者往往未做好就呼吸衰竭接受插管治疗做出决策的准备。我们开发了一种基于网络的决策辅助工具InformedTogether,以促进重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者为是否接受有创机械通气治疗呼吸衰竭做出决策做好准备。

目的

我们描述InformedTogether决策辅助工具的可行性测试。

方法

在门诊肺部和老年病诊所进行干预前和干预后的混合方法可行性研究。临床医生将InformedTogether用于重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者。患者参与者完成了关于使用InformedTogether的干预前和干预后评估。所测量的结果如下:可行性/可接受性、沟通(风险沟通综合结果测量量表[COMRADE]、医学沟通能力量表[MCCS]、观察患者参与度量表[OPTION])以及InformedTogether对改变患者知识、决策冲突量表和动机的有效性。

结果

我们在六个地点招募了11名临床医生和38名慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者。可行性/可接受性:临床医生和患者对可接受性问题给出了积极回应(分别为平均74.1/89满分[标准差7.24]和平均59.63/61[标准差4.49])。沟通:96%的临床医生表示InformedTogether改善了沟通(改良MCCS平均44.54/49[标准差2.97];平均OPTION得分32.03/48[标准差9.27];平均COMRADE满意度4.31/5.0[标准差0.58];以及COMRADE信心4.18/5.0[标准差0.56])。偏好:80%的患者在1个月内与他们的代理人讨论了偏好。有效性:使用InformedTogether后知识得分显著提高(平均差异3.61[标准差3.44],P =.001),决策冲突减少(决策冲突量表干预前/干预后平均差异-13.76[标准差20.39],P =.006)。观看决策辅助工具后动机增强。

结论

InformedTogether支持慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者、临床医生和代理人之间的高质量沟通和共同决策。使用InformedTogether后知识增加以及有机会深思和讨论治疗选择应会导致在危重病时决策得到改善。

相似文献

3
Other Ways of Knowing.
Med Decis Making. 2017 Apr;37(3):216-229. doi: 10.1177/0272989X16683938. Epub 2017 Jan 6.
7

本文引用的文献

1
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 12;4(4):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub5.
2
Other Ways of Knowing.
Med Decis Making. 2017 Apr;37(3):216-229. doi: 10.1177/0272989X16683938. Epub 2017 Jan 6.
3
Decisional Conflict, Regret, and the Burden of Rational Decision Making.
Med Decis Making. 2017 Jan;37(1):3-5. doi: 10.1177/0272989X16657544.
4
A systematic review of effectiveness of decision aids to assist older patients at the end of life.
Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Mar;100(3):425-435. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.10.007. Epub 2016 Oct 11.
8
What is MOLST?
R I Med J (2013). 2014 May 1;97(5):44-6.

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

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验