Herath Matheesha, Reid Jessica L, Ting Ying Yang, Bradshaw Emma L, Edwards Suzanne, Bruening Martin, Maddern Guy J
Department of Surgery, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, The University of Adelaide, 28 Woodville Road, Woodville South, SA, Australia.
Adelaide Health Technology Assessment (AHTA), School of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
EClinicalMedicine. 2023 Mar 10;57:101893. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101893. eCollection 2023 Mar.
Communication is the foundation of a strong doctor-patient relationship. Holistic care of the patient involves good communication and empathy. There are various tools and interventions aimed at increasing the Surgeon's performance, but these have the drawback of heavy cost and time commitments. In contrast, patient focused interventions are often simple and cheap. In surgery this is an evolving field, and little is known about the impact these interventions have on clinical encounters. The aim of this review is to determine how patient focussed interventions impact communication in the Surgical Outpatient Consultation.
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, two reviewers independently searched MEDLINE (incl. PubMed), EMBASE, EMCARE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library for the period starting 01 February 1990 to 01 February 2022. Filtration and screening was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Conflicts were resolved by discussion. Risk of Bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool. Meta-analyses were conducted by an independent statistician using Stata Statistical Software. This systematic review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (ID CRD42022311112).
After screening, 38 papers were included in the final analysis. These involved 6392 patients consisting of 32 randomised controlled trials (RCT), one crossover RCT, three non-randomised experimental studies, and three cohort studies. All articles were published between 1999 and 2022. Four types of intervention were identified: Patient Decision Aids, Educational Materials, Question Prompt Lists and Patient Reported Outcome Measures. There was much heterogeneity in the reported results but ultimately four recurring domains for assessing quality of communication were identified: Patient knowledge; decisional conflict; satisfaction; and anxiety. Meta-analyses showed that patient focussed interventions increased patient knowledge and reduced decisional conflict. Meta-regression demonstrated significant knowledge increases in females compared with males. Results regarding satisfaction and anxiety were not statistically significant.
Our study suggested that patient focused interventions demonstrate promising results for increasing patient engagement and improving communication. Further multicentre randomised controlled trials with consistent validated endpoints should be conducted to evaluate this evolving field.
There was no funding source for this study.
沟通是稳固医患关系的基础。对患者的全面护理涉及良好的沟通与同理心。有多种旨在提高外科医生表现的工具和干预措施,但这些措施存在成本高昂和耗时的缺点。相比之下,以患者为中心的干预措施通常简单且成本低廉。在外科领域,这是一个不断发展的领域,人们对这些干预措施对临床诊疗的影响知之甚少。本综述的目的是确定以患者为中心的干预措施如何影响外科门诊会诊中的沟通。
在这项系统评价和荟萃分析中,两名综述作者独立检索了MEDLINE(包括PubMed)、EMBASE、EMCARE、CINAHL和Cochrane图书馆,检索时间范围为1990年2月1日至2022年2月1日。按照PRISMA指南进行筛选和过滤。通过讨论解决分歧。使用RoB 2工具评估偏倚风险。由一名独立统计学家使用Stata统计软件进行荟萃分析。本系统评价已在PROSPERO(ID CRD42022311112)进行前瞻性注册。
筛选后,38篇论文纳入最终分析。这些研究涉及6392名患者,包括32项随机对照试验(RCT)、1项交叉RCT、3项非随机实验研究和3项队列研究。所有文章均发表于1999年至2022年之间。确定了四种干预类型:患者决策辅助工具、教育材料、问题提示清单和患者报告结局指标。报告结果存在很大异质性,但最终确定了四个反复出现的评估沟通质量的领域:患者知识;决策冲突;满意度;以及焦虑。荟萃分析表明,以患者为中心的干预措施增加了患者知识并减少了决策冲突。荟萃回归显示,与男性相比,女性的知识增加显著。关于满意度和焦虑的结果无统计学意义。
我们的研究表明,以患者为中心的干预措施在提高患者参与度和改善沟通方面显示出有前景的结果。应进行更多具有一致验证终点的多中心随机对照试验,以评估这个不断发展的领域。
本研究没有资金来源。