文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
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
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
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 @ 2025

两种早期乳腺癌对话辅助工具在不同实践中的实施和可持续性因素。

Implementation and sustainability factors of two early-stage breast cancer conversation aids in diverse practices.

机构信息

The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Dartmouth College, Lebanon, NH, USA.

Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA.

出版信息

Implement Sci. 2021 May 10;16(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s13012-021-01115-1.


DOI:10.1186/s13012-021-01115-1
PMID:33971913
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8108365/
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Conversation aids can facilitate shared decision-making and improve patient-centered outcomes. However, few examples exist of sustained use of conversation aids in routine care due to numerous barriers at clinical and organizational levels. We explored factors that will promote the sustained use of two early-stage breast cancer conversation aids. We examined differences in opinions between the two conversation aids and across socioeconomic strata. METHODS: We nested this study within a randomized controlled trial that demonstrated the effectiveness of two early-stage breast cancer surgery conversation aids, one text-based and one picture-based. These conversation aids facilitated more shared decision-making and improved the decision process, among other outcomes, across four health systems with socioeconomically diverse patient populations. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of patient participants across conversation aid assignment and socioeconomic status (SES) and collected observations and field notes. We interviewed trial surgeons and other stakeholders. Two independent coders conducted framework analysis using the NOrmalization MeAsure Development through Normalization Process Theory. We also conducted an inductive analysis. We conducted additional sub-analyses based on conversation aid assignment and patient SES. RESULTS: We conducted 73 semi-structured interviews with 43 patients, 16 surgeons, and 14 stakeholders like nurses, cancer center directors, and electronic health record (EHR) experts. Patients and surgeons felt the conversation aids should be used in breast cancer care in the future and were open to various methods of giving and receiving the conversation aid (EHR, email, patient portal, before consultation). Patients of higher SES were more likely to note the conversation aids influenced their treatment discussion, while patients of lower SES noted more influence on their decision-making. Intervention surgeons reported using the conversation aids did not lengthen their typical consultation time. Most intervention surgeons felt using the conversation aids enhanced their usual care after using it a few times, and most patients felt it appeared part of their normal routine. CONCLUSIONS: Key factors that will guide the future sustained implementation of the conversation aids include adapting to existing clinical workflows, flexibility of use, patient characteristics, and communication preferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03136367 , registered on May 2, 2017.

摘要

背景:对话辅助工具可以促进共同决策,并改善以患者为中心的结果。然而,由于临床和组织层面存在众多障碍,很少有持续常规使用对话辅助工具的例子。我们探讨了促进两种早期乳腺癌对话辅助工具持续使用的因素。我们研究了两种对话辅助工具之间以及社会经济阶层之间意见的差异。

方法:我们在一项随机对照试验中嵌套了这项研究,该试验证明了两种早期乳腺癌手术对话辅助工具的有效性,一种基于文本,一种基于图片。这些对话辅助工具在四个具有社会经济多样化患者群体的医疗系统中促进了更多的共同决策,并改善了决策过程等结果。我们对跨越对话辅助工具分配和社会经济地位(SES)的患者参与者进行了有针对性的半结构化访谈,并收集了观察和现场记录。我们采访了试验外科医生和其他利益相关者。两位独立的编码员使用通过规范化进程理论发展的规范化措施开发进行了框架分析。我们还进行了归纳分析。我们根据对话辅助工具的分配和患者 SES 进行了额外的子分析。

结果:我们对 43 名患者、16 名外科医生和 14 名利益相关者(如护士、癌症中心主任和电子健康记录(EHR)专家)进行了 73 次半结构化访谈。患者和外科医生认为对话辅助工具应该在未来用于乳腺癌护理,并且对各种提供和接收对话辅助工具的方法(EHR、电子邮件、患者门户、咨询前)持开放态度。SES 较高的患者更有可能注意到对话辅助工具影响了他们的治疗讨论,而 SES 较低的患者则注意到对话辅助工具对他们的决策有更大的影响。干预外科医生报告说使用对话辅助工具并没有延长他们通常的咨询时间。大多数干预外科医生认为,使用几次对话辅助工具后,他们增强了常规护理,大多数患者认为这似乎是他们常规护理的一部分。

结论:指导未来持续实施对话辅助工具的关键因素包括适应现有临床工作流程、使用的灵活性、患者特征和沟通偏好。

试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT03136367,于 2017 年 5 月 2 日注册。

相似文献

[1]
Implementation and sustainability factors of two early-stage breast cancer conversation aids in diverse practices.

Implement Sci. 2021-5-10

[2]
Prescription of Controlled Substances: Benefits and Risks

2025-1

[3]
Can We Enhance Shared Decision-making for Periacetabular Osteotomy Surgery? A Qualitative Study of Patient Experiences.

Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025-1-1

[4]
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-4-12

[5]
Shared decision-making for people with asthma.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-10-3

[6]
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011-10-5

[7]
Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010-5-12

[8]
Interventions to improve safe and effective medicines use by consumers: an overview of systematic reviews.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014-4-29

[9]
Decision aids for people considering taking part in clinical trials.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015-11-27

[10]
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014-1-28

引用本文的文献

[1]
Translational framework for implementation evaluation and research: implementation strategies derived from normalization process theory.

Implement Sci. 2025-7-27

[2]
The Implementation of Shared Decision-Making Using Patient Decision Aid Tools to Select Breast Cancer Treatment Options: A Systematic Review in the Time of Minimum Quality Standards.

Healthcare (Basel). 2025-3-27

[3]
Shared Decision-Making Tools Implemented in the Electronic Health Record: Scoping Review.

J Med Internet Res. 2025-2-21

[4]
Acceptability and implementation potential of colorectal cancer screening and health literacy training: A qualitative study among general practitioners in deprived areas.

PLoS One. 2025-2-11

[5]
Digital Age Transformation in Patient-Physician Communication: 25-Year Narrative Review (1999-2023).

J Med Internet Res. 2025-1-16

[6]
Centering intersectional breast cancer screening experiences among black, Latina, and white women: a qualitative analysis.

Front Public Health. 2024

[7]
Living Flat: Stories from Women of Color After Mastectomy.

Ann Surg Oncol. 2025-1

[8]
Improving shared decision making in virtual breast cancer surgery consultations.

Am J Surg. 2023-4

[9]
Supporting translation of research evidence into practice-the use of Normalisation Process Theory to assess and inform implementation within randomised controlled trials: a systematic review.

Implement Sci. 2023-10-27

[10]
Implementing shared decision-making interventions in breast cancer clinical practice: a scoping review.

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2023-8-23

本文引用的文献

[1]
What matters most: Randomized controlled trial of breast cancer surgery conversation aids across socioeconomic strata.

Cancer. 2021-2-1

[2]
Using pictures to convey health information: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects on patient and consumer health behaviors and outcomes.

Patient Educ Couns. 2020-10

[3]
A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research.

PLoS One. 2020-5-5

[4]
Challenges and Solutions for the Implementation of Shared Decision-making in Breast Reconstruction.

Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2020-2-6

[5]
Investigation of factors influencing the implementation of two shared decision-making interventions in contraceptive care: a qualitative interview study among clinical and administrative staff.

Implement Sci. 2019-11-9

[6]
Primary Care-Based Staff Ideas for Implementing a Mammography Decision Aid for Women 75+: a Qualitative Study.

J Gen Intern Med. 2019-9-4

[7]
Perceived facilitating and limiting factors for healthcare professionals to adopting a patient decision aid for breast cancer aftercare: A cross-sectional study.

Patient Educ Couns. 2020-1

[8]
The impact and utility of encounter patient decision aids: Systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative synthesis.

Patient Educ Couns. 2018-12-21

[9]
Improving the normalization of complex interventions: part 2 - validation of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory (NPT).

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018-11-15

[10]
Improving the normalization of complex interventions: part 1 - development of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory (NPT).

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018-11-15

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

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索