Suppr超能文献

促进因素和阻碍因素:四级预防方法的定性研究——对现场专家的研究。

Enablers and barriers to a quaternary prevention approach: a qualitative study of field experts.

机构信息

Department of Family Practice and Division of Palliative Care, The University of British Columbia Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Therapeutics Initiative, Department of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology & Therapeutics, The University of British Columbia Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2024 Mar 19;14(3):e076836. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-076836.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

There is a growing concern about the sustainability of healthcare and the impacts of 'overuse' on patients and systems. Quaternary prevention (P4), a concept promoting the protection of patients from medical interventions in which harms outweigh benefits, is well positioned to stimulate reflection and inspire solutions, yet has not been widely adopted. We sought to identify enablers and barriers to a P4 approach, according to field experts and advocates in one health system.

DESIGN

Qualitative methodology, using semistructured interviews and a grounded theory approach facilitated thematic analysis and development of a conceptual model.

SETTING

Virtual interviews, conducted in British Columbia, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

12 field experts, recruited based on their interest and work related to P4 and related concepts.

RESULTS

Four factors were seen as promoting or hindering P4 efforts depending on context: relationship between patient and clinician, education of clinicians and the public, health system design and influencers. We extracted four broad enablers of P4: evidence-based medicine, personal experiences and questioning attitude, public P4 campaigns and experience in resource-poor contexts. There were six barriers: peer pressure between clinicians, awareness and screening campaigns, cognitive biases, cultural factors, complexity of the problem and industry influence.

CONCLUSIONS

Elicited facilitators and impediments to the application of P4 were similar to those seen in existing literature but framed uniquely; our findings place increased emphasis on the clinician-patient relationship as central to decision-making and position other drivers as influencing this relationship. A transition to a model of care that explicitly integrates conscious protection of patients by reducing overtesting, overdiagnosis and overtreatment will require changes across health systems and society.

摘要

目的

人们越来越关注医疗保健的可持续性以及“过度使用”对患者和系统的影响。四级预防(P4)是一个促进保护患者免受弊大于利的医疗干预的概念,它非常适合激发思考和提供解决方案,但尚未得到广泛采用。我们试图根据一个卫生系统中的专家和倡导者的意见,确定采用 P4 方法的促进因素和障碍。

设计

定性方法,使用半结构化访谈和扎根理论方法促进主题分析和概念模型的发展。

设置

在加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省进行的虚拟访谈。

参与者

根据他们对 P4 及相关概念的兴趣和工作,招募了 12 名领域专家作为参与者。

结果

根据背景,有四个因素被视为促进或阻碍 P4 工作:医患关系、临床医生和公众的教育、卫生系统设计和影响者。我们提取了 P4 的四个广泛促进因素:循证医学、个人经验和质疑态度、公众 P4 运动和在资源匮乏环境中的经验。有六个障碍:临床医生之间的同行压力、意识和筛查运动、认知偏差、文化因素、问题的复杂性和行业影响。

结论

诱发 P4 应用的促进因素和障碍与现有文献中看到的因素相似,但框架不同;我们的研究结果更加重视医患关系作为决策的核心,并将其他驱动因素定位为影响这种关系的因素。要向明确通过减少过度检测、过度诊断和过度治疗来有意识地保护患者的护理模式转变,需要在卫生系统和社会中进行变革。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/aec4/10952943/d330ab7bf0f8/bmjopen-2023-076836f01.jpg

相似文献

1
Enablers and barriers to a quaternary prevention approach: a qualitative study of field experts.
BMJ Open. 2024 Mar 19;14(3):e076836. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-076836.
4
Framing overdiagnosis in breast screening: a qualitative study with Australian experts.
BMC Cancer. 2015 Aug 28;15:606. doi: 10.1186/s12885-015-1603-4.
5
Avoiding and identifying errors in health technology assessment models: qualitative study and methodological review.
Health Technol Assess. 2010 May;14(25):iii-iv, ix-xii, 1-107. doi: 10.3310/hta14250.
7
Patient and caregiver perspectives on virtual care: a patient-oriented qualitative study.
CMAJ Open. 2022 Mar 1;10(1):E165-E172. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20210065. Print 2022 Jan-Mar.
8
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

本文引用的文献

1
Biopsy of Canada's family physician shortage.
Fam Med Community Health. 2023 May;11(2). doi: 10.1136/fmch-2023-002236.
2
Responding to the crisis of care.
BMJ. 2023 Feb 24;380:464. doi: 10.1136/bmj.p464.
3
Perspectives from China, India and Sri Lanka on the drivers and potential solutions to overuse and overdiagnosis.
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2023 Apr;28(2):85-88. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2021-111869. Epub 2022 Aug 12.
4
5
Journalists' views on media coverage of medical tests and overdiagnosis: a qualitative study.
BMJ Open. 2021 Jun 1;11(6):e043991. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043991.
6
Strategies to reduce the use of low-value medical tests in primary care: a systematic review.
Br J Gen Pract. 2020 Nov 26;70(701):e858-e865. doi: 10.3399/bjgp20X713693. Print 2020 Dec.
8
The challenge of implementing Less is More medicine: A European perspective.
Eur J Intern Med. 2020 Jun;76:1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2020.04.014. Epub 2020 Apr 15.
9
Is it really always only the others who are to blame? GP's view on medical overuse. A questionnaire study.
PLoS One. 2020 Jan 15;15(1):e0227457. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227457. eCollection 2020.
10
Quaternary prevention: an evidence-based concept aiming to protect patients from medical harm.
Br J Gen Pract. 2019 Nov 28;69(689):614-615. doi: 10.3399/bjgp19X706913. Print 2019 Dec.

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