Suppr超能文献

在德国,与医生的判断相比,从生活在痴呆症中的人群中引出对以患者为中心的护理的定量、基于选择的偏好:混合方法 PreDemCare 研究的研究方案。

Elicitation of quantitative, choice-based preferences for Person-Centered Care among People living with Dementia in comparison to physicians' judgements in Germany: study protocol for the mixed-methods PreDemCare-study.

机构信息

German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases e.V. (DZNE), Site Rostock / Greifswald, Ellernholzstraße 1-2, 17487, Greifswald, Germany.

Institute for Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald (UMG), Greifswald, Germany.

出版信息

BMC Geriatr. 2022 Jul 8;22(1):567. doi: 10.1186/s12877-022-03238-6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Person-Centered-Care (PCC) requires knowledge about patient preferences. Among People-living-with-Dementia (PlwD) data on quantitative, choice-based preferences, which would allow to quantify, weigh and rank patient-relevant elements of dementia-care, and identify most/least preferred choices, are limited. The Analytic-Hierarchy-Process (AHP) may be one approach to elicit quantitative, choice-based preferences with PlwD, due to simple pairwise comparisons of individual criteria from a complex decision-problem, e.g. health care decisions. Furthermore, data on congruence of patient preferences with physicians' judgements for PCC are missing. If patient preferences and physicians' judgements differ, provision of PCC becomes unlikely. An understanding of patient preferences compared to physician's judgements will support the implementation of truly PCC, i.e. state of the art dementia-care aligned with patient preferences.

METHODS

This mixed-methods-study will be based on the results from a previous systematic review and conducted in three phases: (I) literature-based key intervention-categories of PCC will be investigated during qualitative interviews with Dementia-Care-Managers (DCMs) and PlwD to identify actually patient-relevant (sub) criteria of PCC; (II) based on findings from phase I, an AHP-survey will be designed and pre-tested for face- and content-validity, and consistency during face-to-face "thinking-aloud"-interviews with PlwD and two expert panels (DCMs and physicians); (III) the developed survey will elicit patient preferences and physicians' judgements for PCC. To assess individual importance weights for (sub) criteria in both groups, the Principal-Eigenvector-Method will be applied. Weights will be aggregated per group by Aggregation-of-Individual-Priorities-mode. Descriptive and interferential statistical analyses will be conducted to assess congruence of importance-weights between groups. Subgroup-analyses shall investigate participant-heterogeneities, sensitivity of AHP-results shall be tested by inclusion/exclusion of inconsistent respondents.

DISCUSSION

Little research is published on quantitative, choice-based preferences in dementia care. We expect that (1) PlwD have preferences and can express these, (2) that the AHP is a suitable technique to elicit quantitative, choice-based preferences among PlwD, and (3) to identify a divergence between patient preferences and physicians' judgements for PCC. With the help of the AHP-technique, which supports systematic decision-making including multiple criteria, it may be possible to involve PlwD in future care decisions (patient participation) and ensure implementation of truly Person-Centered-Dementia-Care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Approval of the study was granted by the Ethics Committee at the University Medicine Greifswald the 09Apr2021 (Reg.-Nr.: BB 018-21, BB 018-21a, BB 018-21b).

摘要

背景

以人为中心的护理(PCC)需要了解患者的偏好。在与痴呆症患者(PlwD)相关的数据中,基于定量选择偏好的数据有限,这些数据可以对痴呆症护理的相关元素进行量化、权衡和排序,并确定最/最不偏好的选择。层次分析法(AHP)可能是一种从复杂决策问题中对个体标准进行简单的两两比较,从而引出 PlwD 定量选择偏好的方法,例如医疗保健决策。此外,关于患者偏好与医生对 PCC 评估之间一致性的数据尚不清楚。如果患者偏好与医生的判断存在差异,那么提供 PCC 就不太可能。了解患者偏好与医生判断之间的差异将支持真正的以人为中心的护理的实施,即与患者偏好一致的最先进的痴呆症护理。

方法

本混合方法研究将基于先前系统评价的结果,并分三个阶段进行:(I)通过对痴呆症护理经理(DCM)和 PlwD 进行定性访谈,研究基于文献的 PCC 的关键干预类别,以确定与 PCC 实际相关的(子)标准;(II)基于第一阶段的发现,设计和预测试 AHP 调查,以评估与 PlwD 和两个专家小组(DCM 和医生)进行面对面“思考 aloud”访谈时的表面和内容效度以及一致性;(III)开发调查以引出患者对 PCC 的偏好和医生的判断。为了评估两组中(子)标准的个体重要性权重,将应用主特征向量法。将通过聚合个体优先级模式对每个组的权重进行聚合。将对组间权重的重要性进行描述性和干扰性统计分析。亚组分析将调查参与者的异质性,通过纳入/排除不一致的受访者来测试 AHP 结果的敏感性。

讨论

关于痴呆症护理中的定量选择偏好,发表的研究很少。我们预计(1)PlwD 有偏好并且能够表达这些偏好,(2)AHP 是一种在 PlwD 中引出定量选择偏好的合适技术,以及(3)确定患者对 PCC 的偏好与医生的判断之间存在差异。借助 AHP 技术,该技术支持包括多个标准的系统决策,可能使 PlwD 参与未来的护理决策(患者参与)并确保真正的以人为本的痴呆症护理的实施。

试验注册

2021 年 4 月 9 日,格赖夫斯瓦尔德大学医学伦理委员会批准了该研究(注册号:BB 018-21、BB 018-21a、BB 018-21b)。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8fb6/9270842/e935621bf877/12877_2022_3238_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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