• 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

患者代表:在面对不确定角色和相互冲突的期望时,医疗保健工作组的关键成员。一项定性研究。

Patient representatives: Crucial members of health-care working groups facing an uncertain role and conflicting expectations. A qualitative study.

机构信息

Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2021 Aug;24(4):1197-1206. doi: 10.1111/hex.13249. Epub 2021 May 5.

DOI:10.1111/hex.13249
PMID:33949054
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8369119/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patient representatives (PRs) have been involved for decades in health-care development, and their participation is increasingly sought in health-care working groups (HCWGs) on every level. However, information on how the role could be further developed and teamwork improved remains sparse.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the role of patient representatives in clinical practice guideline (CPG) monitoring groups, to describe their contributions and identify possibilities of improvement.

DESIGN

Qualitative design using semi-structured interviews analysed by content analysis.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Interviews were conducted with 11 PRs, 13 registered nurses, and 9 physicians, all members of national committees monitoring CPGs for cancer in Sweden.

RESULTS

Most participants considered the PR role important but mentioned several problems. PRs' contributions were hampered by uncertainties about their role, the low expectations of other group members and their sense that their contributions were often disregarded. Some professionals questioned whether PRs were truly representative and said some topics could not be discussed with PRs present.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the fundamental problems that remain to be solved despite the long involvement of PRs in HCWGs. Even though the PR role and teamwork differed between the groups, most PRs need to be empowered to be actively involved in the teamwork and have their engagement and knowledge fully utilized. Enhancing teamwork through clarifying roles and expectations could lead to more inclusive and equal teams able to work more effectively towards the goal of improving health care.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

PRs were information givers in data collection.

摘要

背景

患者代表(PR)参与医疗保健发展已有数十年的历史,各级医疗保健工作组(HCWG)越来越多地寻求他们的参与。然而,关于如何进一步发展这一角色以及改善团队合作的信息仍然很少。

目的

探讨患者代表在临床实践指南(CPG)监测小组中的角色,描述他们的贡献,并确定改进的可能性。

设计

使用半结构化访谈进行定性设计,通过内容分析进行分析。

地点和参与者

访谈对象为 11 名 PR、13 名注册护士和 9 名医生,他们均为瑞典全国委员会成员,负责监测癌症 CPG。

结果

大多数参与者认为 PR 角色很重要,但提到了几个问题。PR 的贡献受到以下因素的阻碍:对其角色的不确定性、其他小组成员的期望较低,以及他们觉得自己的贡献经常被忽视。一些专业人员质疑 PR 是否真正具有代表性,并表示有些话题不能在 PR 在场的情况下进行讨论。

结论

本研究强调了尽管 PR 长期参与 HCWG,但仍存在许多未解决的基本问题。尽管 PR 角色和团队合作因小组而异,但大多数 PR 需要被授权积极参与团队合作,并充分利用他们的参与和知识。通过明确角色和期望来加强团队合作,可以使团队更加包容和平等,更有效地朝着改善医疗保健的目标努力。

患者或公众贡献

PR 是数据收集的信息提供者。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0216/8369119/58ed4b806e35/HEX-24-1197-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0216/8369119/58ed4b806e35/HEX-24-1197-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0216/8369119/58ed4b806e35/HEX-24-1197-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Patient representatives: Crucial members of health-care working groups facing an uncertain role and conflicting expectations. A qualitative study.患者代表:在面对不确定角色和相互冲突的期望时,医疗保健工作组的关键成员。一项定性研究。
Health Expect. 2021 Aug;24(4):1197-1206. doi: 10.1111/hex.13249. Epub 2021 May 5.
2
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.医疗专业人员在急症医院环境中团队合作教育的经验:对定性文献的系统综述
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):96-137. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-1843.
3
Promoting and supporting self-management for adults living in the community with physical chronic illness: A systematic review of the effectiveness and meaningfulness of the patient-practitioner encounter.促进和支持社区中患有慢性身体疾病的成年人进行自我管理:对医患互动的有效性和意义的系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(13):492-582. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907130-00001.
4
Prescribers and pharmaceutical representatives: why are we still meeting?医生和医药代表:我们为什么还要见面?
J Gen Intern Med. 2009 Jul;24(7):795-801. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-0989-6. Epub 2009 May 8.
5
Citizens' participation in the Italian health-care system: the experience of the Mixed Advisory Committees.公民对意大利医疗保健系统的参与:混合咨询委员会的经验
Health Expect. 2014 Aug;17(4):488-99. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00775.x. Epub 2012 Apr 19.
6
[Involvement of patient representatives in clinical practice guideline development: a qualitative study].[患者代表参与临床实践指南制定:一项定性研究]
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2014;108(10):587-93. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2014.10.009. Epub 2014 Nov 16.
7
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
8
Overcoming challenges to teamwork in patient-centered medical homes: a qualitative study.克服以患者为中心的医疗之家团队合作中的挑战:一项定性研究。
J Gen Intern Med. 2015 Feb;30(2):183-92. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-3065-9.
9
Student and educator experiences of maternal-child simulation-based learning: a systematic review of qualitative evidence protocol.基于母婴模拟学习的学生和教育工作者体验:定性证据协议的系统评价
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):14-26. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1694.
10
[The analysis of physicians' work: announcing the end of attempts at in vitro fertilization].[医生工作分析:宣告体外受精尝试的终结]
Encephale. 2003 Jul-Aug;29(4 Pt 1):293-305.

引用本文的文献

1
Evaluating the impact of a patient-representative model of support for women affected by cervical cancer.评估患者代表模式对受宫颈癌影响女性的支持效果。
Womens Health (Lond). 2025 Jan-Dec;21:17455057251351415. doi: 10.1177/17455057251351415. Epub 2025 Jul 18.
2
The Perspectives of Healthcare Professionals and Managers on Patient Involvement in Care Pathway Development: A Discourse Analysis.医疗保健专业人员和管理人员对患者参与护理路径制定的看法:话语分析。
Health Expect. 2024 Jun;27(3):e14101. doi: 10.1111/hex.14101.

本文引用的文献

1
How can we describe impact of adult patient participation in health-service development? A scoping review.如何描述成年患者参与卫生服务发展的影响? 范围综述。
Patient Educ Couns. 2020 Aug;103(8):1453-1466. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.02.028. Epub 2020 Feb 20.
2
"Patient participation" and related concepts: A scoping review on their dimensional composition.“患者参与”及相关概念:对其维度构成的范围综述。
Patient Educ Couns. 2020 Jan;103(1):5-14. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2019.08.001. Epub 2019 Aug 8.
3
Training curriculum to help patient representatives participate meaningfully in the development of clinical practice guidelines.
培训课程,帮助患者代表有意义地参与临床实践指南的制定。
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2019 Dec;24(6):227-230. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2019-111186. Epub 2019 Apr 30.
4
The significance of patient participation in nursing care - a concept analysis.患者参与护理的意义——一项概念分析
Scand J Caring Sci. 2019 Mar;33(1):244-251. doi: 10.1111/scs.12609. Epub 2018 Aug 2.
5
Impact of patient involvement on clinical practice guideline development: a parallel group study.患者参与对临床实践指南制定的影响:一项平行组研究。
Implement Sci. 2018 Apr 16;13(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0745-6.
6
The Fundamentals of Care Framework as a Point-of-Care Nursing Theory.作为护理现场理论的护理基础框架
Nurs Res. 2018 Mar/Apr;67(2):99-107. doi: 10.1097/NNR.0000000000000271.
7
Patient involvement in guidelines is poor five years after institute of medicine standards: review of guideline methodologies.在医学研究所制定标准五年后,患者在指南中的参与度仍然很低:指南方法学综述
Res Involv Engagem. 2017 Oct 2;3:19. doi: 10.1186/s40900-017-0070-2. eCollection 2017.
8
Incorporating patients' views in guideline development: a systematic review of guidance documents.将患者观点纳入指南制定:对指导文件的系统评价
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Aug;88:102-112. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.05.018. Epub 2017 Jun 1.
9
Recommendations for patient engagement in guideline development panels: A qualitative focus group study of guideline-naïve patients.患者参与指南制定小组的建议:一项针对初次接触指南患者的定性焦点小组研究。
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 20;12(3):e0174329. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174329. eCollection 2017.
10
Code Saturation Versus Meaning Saturation: How Many Interviews Are Enough?代码饱和度与意义饱和度:多少次访谈才算足够?
Qual Health Res. 2017 Mar;27(4):591-608. doi: 10.1177/1049732316665344. Epub 2016 Sep 26.