VITAM - Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et services sociaux (CIUSSS) de la Capitale-Nationale, Quebec City, Canada; Department of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Pavillon Ferdinand-Vandry, Quebec City, Canada; Research Centre of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, Quebec City, Canada.
Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2022 Jun;171:22-29. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2022.04.006. Epub 2022 May 21.
In Canada, government mandates for patient-centred care (PCC) vary across the 10 provinces and three territories. Although basic medical and hospital services are provided for all, health care options for patients also depend on having private insurance. Thus, the current design of the Canadian healthcare system has several implications for PCC and shared decision-making (SDM). Since 2007, this is our fourth update on SDM in Canada. The aim of this paper is to provide an update on the current state of SDM and patient and public involvement in Canada. Overall, we still observed the difficulty of implementing any sort of national strategy partly because of the decentralized nature of the healthcare system. Second, national professional education programs are complicated by licensure and scope of practice variations across jurisdictions. Third, there are variations in the availability of different options covered by universal healthcare. Canada has experienced some favorable development as PCC is now explicitly articulated in the policies of most provinces and territories and there are increased efforts to give patients more access to their electronic health records. However, patient and public engagement (PPE) reform in health programs and governance remains an exception, and continuing centralization of governance structures may reduce their responsiveness to patient priorities. In a 2018 survey, 47.2% of respondents reported that they were not told by their health professional that they had a choice about treatment. Nonetheless, decision aids and decision coaching are increasingly available for health-related decisions and the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute's decision aid inventory has ensured continued leadership in this area. Diverse jurisdictions are starting to embed decision aids into care pathways, with some decision aids being included in clinical practice guidelines. The COVID-19 pandemic may have had a negative impact on SDM by removing decision choices due to emergency public health mandates, but stimulated new research and decision aids. Canada continues to assign health research funding to SDM and PCC, and a program dedicated to patient-oriented research is central to this effort. Guides and frameworks are increasingly available for planning and evaluating PPE. Finally, various initiatives are attempting to involve and empower Indigenous peoples through PPE and SDM.
在加拿大,10 个省和 3 个地区对以患者为中心的护理(PCC)的政府要求各不相同。尽管为所有人提供了基本的医疗和医院服务,但患者的医疗保健选择也取决于是否拥有私人保险。因此,加拿大现行的医疗保健系统设计对 PCC 和共享决策(SDM)有几个影响。自 2007 年以来,这是我们第四次更新加拿大的 SDM 信息。本文的目的是提供加拿大 SDM 和患者及公众参与现状的最新情况。总体而言,我们仍然观察到实施任何国家战略的困难,部分原因是医疗保健系统的分散性质。其次,国家专业教育计划因管辖范围内的许可和实践范围的差异而变得复杂。第三,全民医疗保健涵盖的不同选择的可用性也存在差异。加拿大在 PCC 方面经历了一些有利的发展,因为现在大多数省份和地区的政策都明确阐述了 PCC,并且为患者提供更多访问其电子健康记录的机会。然而,在卫生计划和治理方面,患者和公众参与(PPE)改革仍然是一个例外,治理结构的持续集中化可能会降低他们对患者优先事项的响应能力。在 2018 年的一项调查中,47.2%的受访者表示,他们的医疗专业人员没有告诉他们在治疗方面有选择。尽管如此,决策辅助工具和决策辅导越来越多地用于与健康相关的决策,渥太华医院研究所在决策辅助工具清单方面确保了在这一领域的持续领导力。不同的司法管辖区开始将决策辅助工具嵌入护理路径中,一些决策辅助工具被纳入临床实践指南。COVID-19 大流行可能通过紧急公共卫生命令取消决策选择对 SDM 产生了负面影响,但激发了新的研究和决策辅助工具。加拿大继续将健康研究资金分配给 SDM 和 PCC,一个专门针对以患者为中心的研究的项目是这一努力的核心。用于规划和评估 PPE 的指南和框架越来越多。最后,各种倡议正在试图通过 PPE 和 SDM 让原住民参与并赋予他们权力。