• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

患者仍然被忽视:焦虑症患者的共同决策过程。

Users remain overlooked: Shared decision-making processes for people with anxiety disorders.

作者信息

Villena Amelia, Hurtado María M, Gómez Clara, Amor Gisela, Vega Amanda, Morales-Asencio José Miguel

机构信息

Mental Health Unit, Regional University Hospital of Málaga, Málaga, Spain.

Faculty of Health Sciences, Universidad de Málaga, Málaga, Spain.

出版信息

J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2025 Feb;32(1):203-214. doi: 10.1111/jpm.13095. Epub 2024 Aug 20.

DOI:10.1111/jpm.13095
PMID:39161272
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11704998/
Abstract

UNLABELLED

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Patients do not always receive enough information about their diagnosis and their perceived participation in decision-making about their treatment is low. Some participants reported feeling very uncertain when the physician invited them to choose between these options. Others users expressed their satisfaction with the trend away from paternalistic attitudes in the health system. There is a trend towards pharmacological prescription as a first approximation. This contrasts with the recommendations of scientific organizations based on evidence and cost-effectiveness studies on the offer of psychological interventions as the first option. The user groups pointed out that active coping, based on exposure to anxiety-generating situations, made a significant contribution to alleviating their anxiety disorders. However, some of those interviewed rejected this type of intervention. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Users diagnosed with anxiety disorders miss more information about the disorder and participation in its treatment. Opposite positions coexist in terms of participation in the choice of treatment. Pharmacological treatment is most commonly the first option offered. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: This study is an example in itself of the involvement of users in the healthcare process, and therefore placing them at the centre of attention, as reflected in healthcare policies and clinical practice guidelines. It promotes the identification of needs that users diagnosed of anxiety disorders may have, with the aim of putting in place, from healthcare professionals and health services, the necessary supports adapted to these. Mental health nurses are well-positioned to offer support and guidance during the process of involvement and shared decision-making.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: An essential aspect of mental health treatment and recovery is the degree of involvement by health service users in the process.

AIM/QUESTION: Explore the values, demands and preferences of persons diagnosed with anxiety disorders, their participation in the treatment provided, and the response of the health system in this regard.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted, with 51 participants. Nine focus groups and four in-depth interviews took place.

RESULTS

Three broad categories were identified: (1) diagnosis; (2) treatment options offered and shared decision-making; and (3) coping with the disorder. Sometimes patients do not receive enough information to cover their needs. A trend towards drug prescription as a first approach was observed, while active coping based on exposure to anxiogenic situations was indicated as the most effective option.

CONCLUSION

Shared decision-making is a necessary aspect of treatment, and the therapeutic process should be adapted to match the service user's preferences, values and needs.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PRACTICE

This research identifies the needs of patients diagnosed with anxiety disorders and promotes, therefore, from healthcare professionals and services, the provision of measures to meet these needs.

摘要

未标注

关于该主题已知的信息有哪些?:患者并不总是能获得关于其诊断的足够信息,并且他们感觉自己对治疗决策的参与度较低。一些参与者报告说,当医生邀请他们在这些选项之间进行选择时,他们感到非常不确定。其他用户对医疗系统中家长式态度的转变表示满意。有一种将药物处方作为首选方法的趋势。这与科学组织基于证据和成本效益研究提出的将心理干预作为首选的建议形成对比。用户群体指出,基于暴露于引发焦虑的情境的积极应对方式,对缓解他们的焦虑症有显著贡献。然而,一些受访者拒绝这种干预方式。本文对现有知识的补充有哪些?:被诊断患有焦虑症的用户缺乏更多关于该疾病及其治疗参与方面的信息。在治疗选择的参与方面存在相反的立场。药物治疗最常作为首选提供。对实践有哪些启示?:本研究本身就是用户参与医疗过程的一个例子,因此将他们置于关注的中心,这在医疗政策和临床实践指南中有所体现。它促进了对被诊断患有焦虑症的用户可能存在的需求的识别,目的是让医疗专业人员和医疗服务机构提供适应这些需求的必要支持。心理健康护士在参与和共同决策过程中处于提供支持和指导的有利位置。

摘要

引言:心理健康治疗和康复的一个重要方面是医疗服务用户在这一过程中的参与程度。

目的/问题:探讨被诊断患有焦虑症的人的价值观、需求和偏好,他们对所提供治疗的参与情况,以及医疗系统在这方面的反应。

方法

进行了一项定性研究,有51名参与者。开展了9个焦点小组和4次深入访谈。

结果

确定了三大类:(1)诊断;(2)提供的治疗选择和共同决策;(3)应对该疾病。有时患者没有得到足够满足其需求的信息。观察到有一种将药物处方作为首选方法的趋势,而基于暴露于引发焦虑的情境的积极应对方式被认为是最有效的选择。

结论

共同决策是治疗的一个必要方面,治疗过程应根据服务用户的偏好、价值观和需求进行调整。

对实践的启示

本研究确定了被诊断患有焦虑症的患者的需求,因此促进医疗专业人员和服务机构提供满足这些需求的措施。

相似文献

1
Users remain overlooked: Shared decision-making processes for people with anxiety disorders.患者仍然被忽视:焦虑症患者的共同决策过程。
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2025 Feb;32(1):203-214. doi: 10.1111/jpm.13095. Epub 2024 Aug 20.
2
A qualitative systematic review of internal and external influences on shared decision-making in all health care settings.对所有医疗环境中共同决策的内部和外部影响进行的定性系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2012;10(58):4633-4646. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2012-432.
3
Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions.心理健康问题患者的共同决策干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Nov 11;11(11):CD007297. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007297.pub3.
4
Service users' experiences of participation in decision making in mental health services.服务使用者参与精神卫生服务决策的体验。
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2015 Nov;22(9):688-97. doi: 10.1111/jpm.12246. Epub 2015 Jul 3.
5
Can We Enhance Shared Decision-making for Periacetabular Osteotomy Surgery? A Qualitative Study of Patient Experiences.我们能否加强髋臼周围截骨术的共同决策?一项关于患者体验的定性研究。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Jan 1;483(1):120-136. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003198. Epub 2024 Jul 23.
6
Being in a space of sharing decision-making for dignified mental care.处于共享决策的空间,以实现有尊严的精神关怀。
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2019 Nov;26(9-10):368-376. doi: 10.1111/jpm.12548. Epub 2019 Aug 23.
7
Shared decision-making in the treatment of adolescents diagnosed with depression: A cross-sectional survey of mental health professionals in China.中国青少年抑郁症治疗中的共享决策:精神卫生专业人员的横断面调查。
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2024 Jun;31(3):340-351. doi: 10.1111/jpm.12990. Epub 2023 Oct 26.
8
'I have anxiety, but I have values and preferences' Experiences of users with generalized anxiety disorder: A qualitative study.“我有焦虑,但我有价值观和偏好”:广泛性焦虑障碍患者的体验:一项定性研究。
Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2020 Jun;29(3):521-530. doi: 10.1111/inm.12690. Epub 2020 Jan 7.
9
Caesarean section on maternal request: a qualitative study of conflicts related to shared decision-making and person-centred care in Sweden.产妇要求剖宫产:瑞典一项与共享决策和以患者为中心的护理相关的冲突定性研究。
Reprod Health. 2024 Jul 2;21(1):97. doi: 10.1186/s12978-024-01831-z.
10
The perceptions and experiences of community nurses and patients towards shared decision-making in the home setting: An integrative review.社区护士和患者对家庭环境中共同决策的认知与体验:一项综合综述。
J Adv Nurs. 2025 Feb;81(2):679-700. doi: 10.1111/jan.16345. Epub 2024 Jul 22.

本文引用的文献

1
The Effect of Shared Decision-Making by Mental Health Nurses on Medication Adherence in Patients with Alcohol Use Disorders: Provider-Patient Communication Pathway Model.心理健康护士的共同决策对酒精使用障碍患者药物依从性的影响:医患沟通途径模型。
J Health Commun. 2023 Nov 2;28(11):777-788. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2023.2268561.
2
Experiencing (Shared) Decision Making: Results from a Qualitative Study of People with Mental Illness and Their Family Members.体验(共享)决策:对患有精神疾病的患者及其家庭成员的定性研究结果
Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Aug 9;11(16):2237. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11162237.
3
Prevalence of depression and anxiety in older people in low- and middle- income countries in Africa, Asia and South America: A systematic review and meta-analysis.中低收入国家老年人中抑郁和焦虑的流行情况:非洲、亚洲和南美洲的系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Affect Disord. 2023 Mar 15;325:656-674. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.01.068. Epub 2023 Jan 18.
4
Prevalence of Antenatal Anxiety in European Women: A Literature Review.欧洲女性产前焦虑症的患病率:文献综述。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Jan 8;20(2):1098. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20021098.
5
A new form of checking obsessive-compulsive disorder in physicians: Another consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. A case series.医生中一种新形式的检查强迫症:COVID-19大流行的另一个后果。病例系列
Psychiatry Res Case Rep. 2023 Jun;2(1):100085. doi: 10.1016/j.psycr.2022.100085. Epub 2022 Dec 14.
6
Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions.心理健康问题患者的共同决策干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Nov 11;11(11):CD007297. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007297.pub3.
7
Personalized care planning and shared decision making in collaborative care programs for depression and anxiety disorders: A systematic review.个性化护理计划和共病抑郁焦虑障碍协同护理方案中的共享决策制定:系统综述。
PLoS One. 2022 Jun 10;17(6):e0268649. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268649. eCollection 2022.
8
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Symptoms of Anxiety, Depression, and Insomnia in Spain in the COVID-19 Crisis.一项关于 COVID-19 危机期间西班牙焦虑、抑郁和失眠症状的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jan 17;19(2):1018. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19021018.
9
The impact of shared decision-making on the treatment of anxiety and depressive disorders: systematic review - CORRIGENDUM.共同决策对焦虑症和抑郁症治疗的影响:系统评价——勘误
BJPsych Open. 2021 Nov 17;7(6):e212. doi: 10.1192/bjo.2021.1050.
10
Shared Decision-Making and Information Needs among People with Generalized Anxiety Disorder.广泛性焦虑症患者的共同决策与信息需求
Eur J Investig Health Psychol Educ. 2021 May 21;11(2):423-435. doi: 10.3390/ejihpe11020031.