• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

评估在乳腺癌中的应用:国际调查。

Evaluation of the Use of Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer: International Survey.

机构信息

Unidad de Patología Mamaria del Servicio de Cirugía General, Complexo Universitario Hospitalario de Ourense, 32005 Ourense, Spain.

Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Granada, 18014 Granada, Spain.

出版信息

Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Feb 22;18(4):2128. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18042128.

DOI:10.3390/ijerph18042128
PMID:33671649
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7926688/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess shared decision-making (SDM) knowledge, attitude and application among health professionals involved in breast cancer (BC) treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study based on an online questionnaire, sent by several professional societies to health professionals involved in BC management. There were 26 questions which combined demographic and professional data with some items measured on a Likert-type scale.

RESULTS

The participation (459/541; 84.84%) and completion (443/459; 96.51%) rates were high. Participants strongly agreed or agreed in 69.57% (16/23) of their responses. The majority stated that they knew of SDM (mean 4.43 (4.36-4.55)) and were in favour of its implementation (mean 4.58 (4.51-4.64)). They highlighted that SDM practice was not adequate due to lack of resources (3.46 (3.37-3.55)) and agreed on policies that improved its implementation (3.96 (3.88-4.04)). The main advantage of SDM for participants was patient satisfaction (38%), and the main disadvantage was the patients' paucity of knowledge to understand their disease (24%). The main obstacle indicated was the lack of time and resources (40%).

CONCLUSIONS

New policies must be designed for adequate training of professionals in integrating SDM in clinical practice, preparing them to use SDM with adequate resources and time provided.

摘要

目的

评估参与乳腺癌(BC)治疗的卫生专业人员在共享决策(SDM)方面的知识、态度和应用情况。

材料和方法

这是一项基于在线问卷的横断面研究,由多个专业协会发送给参与 BC 管理的卫生专业人员。问卷共有 26 个问题,结合了人口统计学和专业数据以及一些李克特量表项目。

结果

参与率(459/541;84.84%)和完成率(443/459;96.51%)均较高。在 23 个回答中,有 69.57%(16/23)的参与者强烈同意或同意。大多数参与者表示他们了解 SDM(平均 4.43(4.36-4.55))并支持其实施(平均 4.58(4.51-4.64))。他们强调,由于资源缺乏(3.46(3.37-3.55)),SDM 实践并不充分,并同意改善其实施的政策(3.96(3.88-4.04))。对参与者来说,SDM 的主要优势是患者满意度(38%),主要劣势是患者缺乏理解疾病的知识(24%)。主要障碍是缺乏时间和资源(40%)。

结论

必须制定新的政策,为专业人员提供充分的培训,以将 SDM 整合到临床实践中,使他们能够在提供充足资源和时间的情况下使用 SDM。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7a76/7926688/a7a19a868a44/ijerph-18-02128-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7a76/7926688/8d6eacaa913e/ijerph-18-02128-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7a76/7926688/a7a19a868a44/ijerph-18-02128-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7a76/7926688/8d6eacaa913e/ijerph-18-02128-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7a76/7926688/a7a19a868a44/ijerph-18-02128-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Evaluation of the Use of Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer: International Survey.评估在乳腺癌中的应用:国际调查。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Feb 22;18(4):2128. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18042128.
2
Shared decision making, physicians' explanations, and treatment satisfaction: a cross-sectional survey of prostate cancer patients.共同决策、医生的解释与治疗满意度:一项针对前列腺癌患者的横断面调查。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020 Dec 14;20(1):334. doi: 10.1186/s12911-020-01355-z.
3
Shared decision-making in routine breast cancer care in Germany-A cross-sectional study.德国常规乳腺癌护理中的共同决策——一项横断面研究。
Psychooncology. 2022 Jul;31(7):1120-1126. doi: 10.1002/pon.5898. Epub 2022 Feb 10.
4
Continuing professional education of Iranian healthcare professionals in shared decision-making: lessons learned.伊朗医疗保健专业人员在共同决策方面的继续职业教育:经验教训
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Mar 12;21(1):225. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06233-6.
5
Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals.提高医疗保健专业人员采用共同决策的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 May 12(5):CD006732. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006732.pub2.
6
[Physicians' awareness and assessment of shared decision making in oncology practice.].[医生对肿瘤学实践中共同决策的认识与评估。]
Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2019 Oct 9;93:e201910066.
7
The relationship between evaluation of shared decision-making by pet owners and veterinarians and satisfaction with veterinary consultations.宠物主人和兽医对共同决策评估的关系与兽医咨询满意度之间的关系。
BMC Vet Res. 2022 Aug 2;18(1):296. doi: 10.1186/s12917-022-03401-6.
8
Does the use of shared decision-making consultation behaviors increase treatment decision-making satisfaction among Chinese women facing decision for breast cancer surgery?使用共同决策咨询行为是否会提高面临乳腺癌手术决策的中国女性对治疗决策的满意度?
Patient Educ Couns. 2014 Feb;94(2):243-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.11.006. Epub 2013 Nov 28.
9
Ready for shared decision making: Pretesting a training module for health professionals on sharing decisions with their patients.准备好共同决策:对健康专业人员进行一项关于与患者分享决策的培训模块的预测试。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2020 Apr;26(2):610-621. doi: 10.1111/jep.13380. Epub 2020 Mar 1.
10
Current status of shared decision making for rheumatoid arthritis treatment in Japan: a web-based survey on physicians and patients.日本类风湿关节炎治疗共同决策的现状:一项针对医生和患者的网络调查
Curr Med Res Opin. 2022 May;38(5):853-861. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2022.2050108. Epub 2022 Mar 24.

引用本文的文献

1
Artificial-Intelligence Cloud-Based Platform to Support Shared Decision-Making in the Locoregional Treatment of Breast Cancer: Protocol for a Multidimensional Evaluation Embedded in the CINDERELLA Clinical Trial.基于人工智能云平台支持乳腺癌局部区域治疗的共同决策:灰姑娘临床试验中多维评估方案
Pharmacoecon Open. 2024 Nov;8(6):945-959. doi: 10.1007/s41669-024-00519-1. Epub 2024 Sep 12.
2
Experiences of Indonesian women with breast cancer underwent treatment decision-making: A qualitative study.印度尼西亚乳腺癌女性的治疗决策经历:一项定性研究。
Belitung Nurs J. 2024 Aug 28;10(4):456-463. doi: 10.33546/bnj.3395. eCollection 2024.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Measuring shared decision-making and collaborative goal setting in community rehabilitation: a focused ethnography using cross-sectional surveys in Canada.衡量社区康复中的共同决策与协作目标设定:一项在加拿大运用横断面调查的聚焦人种志研究。
BMJ Open. 2020 Aug 20;10(8):e034745. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034745.
2
Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review.乳腺癌治疗指南中的共同决策:质量评估工具的制定和系统评价。
Health Expect. 2020 Oct;23(5):1045-1064. doi: 10.1111/hex.13112. Epub 2020 Aug 3.
3
The requirements of a specialist breast centre.
Patient experiences and needs in cancer care- results from a nationwide cross-sectional study in Germany.
癌症护理中的患者体验与需求——德国一项全国性横断面研究的结果
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 May 2;24(1):572. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-10951-y.
4
Towards Agility in Breast Cancer Treatment Principles as Adopted from Agile Software Engineering.借鉴敏捷软件工程的乳腺癌治疗原则中的敏捷性
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2024 Mar 23;17:1315-1341. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S449465. eCollection 2024.
5
The factors involved in surgical decision-making in younger women diagnosed with breast cancer in Aotearoa New Zealand: A qualitative analysis.新西兰奥特亚罗瓦地区年轻乳腺癌女性手术决策的相关因素:一项定性分析。
J Health Psychol. 2024 Mar 8;30(1):13591053241237075. doi: 10.1177/13591053241237075.
6
Implications of Agile Values in Software Engineering for Agility in Breast Cancer Treatment: Protocol for a Comparative Study.敏捷价值观在软件工程中对乳腺癌治疗敏捷性的影响:一项比较研究方案。
JMIR Res Protoc. 2023 Dec 5;12:e53124. doi: 10.2196/53124.
7
Implementing shared decision making for early-stage breast cancer treatment using a coproduction learning collaborative: the SHAIR Collaborative protocol.利用共同生产学习协作方式对早期乳腺癌治疗实施共同决策:SHAIR协作方案
Implement Sci Commun. 2023 Jul 14;4(1):79. doi: 10.1186/s43058-023-00453-z.
8
Determining the Development Strategy and Suited Adoption Paths for the Core Competence of Shared Decision-Making Tasks through the SAA-NRM Approach.通过 SAA-NRM 方法确定共享决策任务核心能力的发展策略和适用采用路径。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Oct 15;19(20):13310. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192013310.
9
Success Factors and Barriers in Combining Personalized Medicine and Patient Centered Care in Breast Cancer. Results from a Systematic Review and Proposal of Conceptual Framework.乳腺癌个性化医疗与以患者为中心的护理相结合的成功因素与障碍。系统评价结果及概念框架提案
J Pers Med. 2021 Jul 13;11(7):654. doi: 10.3390/jpm11070654.
10
Breast Cancer Care Quality Indicators in Spain: A Systematic Review.西班牙乳腺癌护理质量指标:系统评价。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jun 13;18(12):6411. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18126411.
专科乳腺中心的要求。
Breast. 2020 Jun;51:65-84. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2020.02.003. Epub 2020 Feb 26.
4
Medical Students' Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Shared Decision Making: Results From a Multinational, Cross-Sectional Survey.医学生对共同决策的知识与态度:一项跨国横断面调查的结果
MDM Policy Pract. 2019 Nov 8;4(2):2381468319885871. doi: 10.1177/2381468319885871. eCollection 2019 Jul-Dec.
5
U.S. Survey of Shared Decision Making Use for Treating Pregnant Women Presenting with Opioid Use Disorder.美国对治疗患有阿片类药物使用障碍的孕妇的共享决策制定的使用情况进行了调查。
Subst Use Misuse. 2019;54(13):2241-2250. doi: 10.1080/10826084.2019.1644524. Epub 2019 Jul 26.
6
[Improving the quality of Spanish web surveys: Spanish adaptation of the checklist for reporting results of internet e-surveys (CHERRIES) to the Spanish context].[提高西班牙网络调查的质量:将互联网电子调查结果报告清单(CHERRIES)适用于西班牙语境进行西班牙语改编]
Aten Primaria. 2019 Nov;51(9):586-589. doi: 10.1016/j.aprim.2019.03.005. Epub 2019 May 3.
7
Shared decision-making experienced by Canadians facing health care decisions: a Web-based survey.面临医疗保健决策的加拿大人所经历的共同决策:一项基于网络的调查。
CMAJ Open. 2019 Apr 4;7(2):E210-E216. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20180202. Print 2019 Apr-Jun.
8
The Effect of Shared Decisionmaking on Patients' Likelihood of Filing a Complaint or Lawsuit: A Simulation Study.共享决策对患者提出投诉或诉讼可能性的影响:一项模拟研究。
Ann Emerg Med. 2019 Jul;74(1):126-136. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.11.017. Epub 2019 Jan 3.
9
Interventions for increasing the use of shared decision making by healthcare professionals.提高医疗保健专业人员共同决策使用率的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jul 19;7(7):CD006732. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006732.pub4.
10
The SDM 3 Circle Model: A Literature Synthesis and Adaptation for Shared Decision Making in the Hospital.SDM三循环模型:医院共享决策的文献综述与改编
J Hosp Med. 2017 Dec;12(12):1001-1008. doi: 10.12788/jhm.2865. Epub 2017 Oct 18.