Department of Preventive Medicine, Health Science Center, Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China.
Department of Nursing, Hubei College of Chinese Medicine, Jingzhou, China.
BMJ Open. 2024 Jul 11;14(7):e079080. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079080.
The objective of this systematic review was to explore the evidence regarding shared decision-making (SDM) in the management of pulmonary nodules.
Systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies.
Studies published in English or Chinese up to April 2022 were extracted from nine databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and CINAHL, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and SinoMed Data.
Studies were eligible if patients or healthcare providers are faced with pulmonary nodule management options or the interventions or experiences were focused on the patient-healthcare provider relationship or health education to make, increase or support shared decisions. All types of studies were included, including quantitative and qualitative studies. Grey literature and literature that had not been peer reviewed were excluded. Poster abstracts and non-empirical publications such as editorials, letters, opinion papers and review articles were excluded.
Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts, assessed quality using Joanna Briggs Institute's critical appraisal tools, and extracted data from included studies. Thematic syntheses were used to identify prominent themes emerging from the data.
A total of 12 studies met the inclusion criteria, 11 of which were conducted in USA. These included six qualitative studies and six quantitative studies (including both survey and quasi-experimental designs). Three major themes with specific subthemes emerged: (1) Opportunity (uncertainty in the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary nodules, willingness to participate in decision-making); (2) Ability (patient's lack of knowledge, physician's experience); and (3) Different worldview (misconception, distress among patients, preference for diagnosis and treatment).
Uncertainty in the management of pulmonary nodules is the opportunity to implement SDM. Patients' lack of knowledge, distress, and misunderstandings between healthcare providers and patients are both the main obstacles and the causes of the application of SDM.
本系统评价旨在探讨在肺结节管理中实施共同决策(SDM)的证据。
对定量和定性研究进行系统评价。
从 9 个数据库(PubMed、PsycINFO、EMBASE、Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science 和 CINAHL、中国国家知识基础设施、万方数据和中国生物医学文献数据库)提取截至 2022 年 4 月发表的英文和中文研究。
如果患者或医疗保健提供者面临肺结节管理选择,或干预措施或经验集中在医患关系或健康教育以做出、增加或支持共同决策,则研究符合入选标准。包括所有类型的研究,包括定量和定性研究。排除灰色文献和未经同行评审的文献,如海报摘要和非实证出版物,如社论、信件、意见论文和评论文章。
两名审查员独立筛选摘要和全文,使用 Joanna Briggs 研究所的批判性评价工具评估质量,并从纳入研究中提取数据。主题综合用于识别数据中出现的突出主题。
共有 12 项研究符合纳入标准,其中 11 项在美国进行。这些研究包括 6 项定性研究和 6 项定量研究(包括调查和准实验设计)。出现了三个主要主题和具体的子主题:(1)机会(肺结节诊断和治疗的不确定性,参与决策的意愿);(2)能力(患者知识不足,医生经验);(3)不同的世界观(误解、患者的痛苦、对诊断和治疗的偏好)。
肺结节管理中的不确定性是实施 SDM 的机会。患者缺乏知识、痛苦和医患之间的误解既是 SDM 应用的主要障碍,也是其应用的原因。