• 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

一项探索和比较爱尔兰医疗环境中药物管理关键因素的定量研究。

A Quantitative Study Exploring and Comparing Key Factors in Medication Management in the Irish Healthcare Setting.

作者信息

O'Donovan Bernadine, Kirke Ciara, Pate Muriel, McHugh Sheena, Bennett Kathleen, Cahir Caitríona

机构信息

Data Science Centre, School of Population Health, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland.

Medication Safety, Quality Improvement Division, Health Service Executive (HSE), Dublin, Ireland.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2025 Apr;28(2):e70256. doi: 10.1111/hex.70256.

DOI:10.1111/hex.70256
PMID:40221845
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11993810/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making in the context of medication management has been shown to be contingent on information-seeking behaviours such as patient knowledge, self-efficacy and engagement.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to: (i) compare differences in perceptions of patients' knowledge, capabilities and engagement across healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients and family caregivers and (ii) investigate associations between these factors and patients' medication beliefs using a cross-sectional survey study of patients, family caregivers and community and hospital HCPs in Ireland.

METHODS

Two cross-sectional surveys measuring key factors in medication management were distributed to patients and family caregivers taking three or more medicines and HCPs involved in medicines management. χ tests were used to investigate differences between HCPs and patients and family caregivers. Multivariable linear regression with adjustment for the socio-demographic covariates was used to examine key factors in medication management and beliefs about medicine (BMQ-General) in patients and family caregivers.

RESULTS

Overall, 636 responses were received; patients and family caregivers (N = 134, 21%), community (N = 313, 49%) and hospital HCPs (N = 189, 30%). A higher proportion of patients and family caregivers self-reported as 'knowledgeable' about medications (N = 76; 56.7%) than community (N = 75, 24%) and hospital HCPs (N = 44, 23.3%) (p < 0.01). The majority of patients and family caregivers were 'fairly/very confident' they could maintain an accurate medication list without assistance (N = 78; 58.2%), compared to the majority of the community (N = 213, 68.1%) and hospital HCPs (N = 114, 60.3%) who were 'not at all/somewhat confident' (p < 0.01.) These patients and family caregivers also had significantly lower overall beliefs in medication harm (β = -1.23, 95% CI: -2.34, -0.13). Patient and family caregivers who asked HCPs about their medication frequently (> 7 times per year) had higher overall beliefs in medication overuse (β = 1.88, 95% CI: 0.06, 3.69) and medication harm (β = 2.65, 95% CI: 1.10, 4.20), compared to those who never asked.

CONCLUSION

There was divergence between HCPs and patients and family caregivers in their assessments of patients' medication knowledge and capabilities. Engagement between HCPs and patients around medication should be purposeful rather than frequent, to alleviate fears about overuse and harm.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The patient and family caregiver survey was developed in partnership with members of the Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) group. Feedback was provided by the group to increase accessibility of survey and maximise distribution. In addition, the survey was piloted among members of the public involved in medication management.

摘要

背景

在药物管理背景下的共同决策已被证明取决于诸如患者知识、自我效能感和参与度等信息寻求行为。

目的

本研究的目的是:(i)比较医疗保健专业人员(HCPs)、患者以及患者家属和护理人员对患者知识、能力和参与度认知的差异;(ii)通过对爱尔兰的患者、患者家属和护理人员以及社区和医院的医疗保健专业人员进行横断面调查研究,调查这些因素与患者用药信念之间的关联。

方法

向服用三种或更多药物的患者和患者家属及护理人员以及参与药物管理的医疗保健专业人员发放了两份测量药物管理关键因素的横断面调查问卷。χ检验用于调查医疗保健专业人员与患者以及患者家属和护理人员之间的差异。使用对社会人口统计学协变量进行调整的多变量线性回归来检查患者和患者家属及护理人员在药物管理和药物信念(BMQ-一般)方面的关键因素。

结果

总共收到636份回复;患者和患者家属及护理人员(N = 134,21%)、社区(N = 313,49%)和医院医疗保健专业人员(N = 189,30%)。自我报告对药物“了解”的患者和患者家属及护理人员的比例(N = 76;56.7%)高于社区(N = 75,24%)和医院医疗保健专业人员(N = 44,23.3%)(p < 0.01)。大多数患者和患者家属及护理人员“相当/非常有信心”在没有帮助的情况下能够维持准确的用药清单(N = 78;58.2%),相比之下,大多数社区(N = 213,68.1%)和医院医疗保健专业人员(N = 114,60.3%)“完全没有/有点信心”(p < 0.01)。这些患者和患者家属及护理人员对药物危害的总体信念也显著较低(β = -1.23,95%置信区间:-2.34,-0.13)。与从不询问的患者和患者家属及护理人员相比,每年向医疗保健专业人员询问药物情况超过7次的患者和患者家属及护理人员对药物过度使用(β = 1.88,95%置信区间:0.06,3.69)和药物危害(β = 2.65,95%置信区间:1.10,4.20)的总体信念更高。

结论

医疗保健专业人员与患者以及患者家属和护理人员在对患者用药知识和能力的评估上存在差异。医疗保健专业人员与患者围绕药物进行的互动应该是有目的的,而不是频繁的,以减轻对过度使用和危害的担忧。

患者或公众贡献

患者和患者家属及护理人员调查问卷是与患者和公众参与(PPI)小组的成员合作制定的。该小组提供了反馈,以提高调查问卷的可及性并最大限度地扩大分发范围。此外,该调查问卷在参与药物管理的公众成员中进行了预试验。

相似文献

1
A Quantitative Study Exploring and Comparing Key Factors in Medication Management in the Irish Healthcare Setting.一项探索和比较爱尔兰医疗环境中药物管理关键因素的定量研究。
Health Expect. 2025 Apr;28(2):e70256. doi: 10.1111/hex.70256.
2
Determinants and Experiences of Care-Seeking for Childhood Pneumonia in a Rural Indian Setting: A Mixed-Methods Study.印度农村地区儿童肺炎就医的决定因素与经历:一项混合方法研究
Health Expect. 2025 Apr;28(2):e70263. doi: 10.1111/hex.70263.
3
Association between healthcare practitioners' beliefs about statins and patients' beliefs and adherence.医护人员对他汀类药物的信念与患者的信念和依从性之间的关系。
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2021 Mar;87(3):1082-1088. doi: 10.1111/bcp.14467. Epub 2020 Jul 26.
4
Attitudes towards deprescribing among multi-ethnic community-dwelling older patients and caregivers in Malaysia: a cross-sectional questionnaire study.马来西亚多族群社区居住的老年患者和照护者对药物减量的态度:一项横断面问卷调查研究。
Int J Clin Pharm. 2019 Jun;41(3):793-803. doi: 10.1007/s11096-019-00829-z. Epub 2019 Apr 24.
5
Low back pain beliefs are associated to age, location of work, education and pain-related disability in Chinese healthcare professionals working in China: a cross sectional survey.在中国工作的中国医护人员中,腰痛观念与年龄、工作地点、教育程度及疼痛相关残疾有关:一项横断面调查。
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014 Jul 28;15:255. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-255.
6
Insights from the ACTION Teens Study: a survey of adolescents living with obesity, their caregivers and healthcare professionals in the UK.ACTION Teens 研究的启示:对英国肥胖青少年及其照顾者和医疗保健专业人员的调查。
BMJ Open. 2024 Jul 23;14(7):e086391. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-086391.
7
Attitudes and beliefs of healthcare providers toward vaccination in the United States: A cross-sectional online survey.美国医疗服务提供者对疫苗接种的态度和信念:一项横断面在线调查。
Vaccine. 2024 Dec 2;42(26):126437. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126437. Epub 2024 Oct 16.
8
Communication Processes Related to Decision-Making in Medication Management Between Healthcare Providers, Older People and Their Carers: A Systematic Review.医疗保健提供者、老年人及其护理人员之间药物管理决策相关的沟通流程:一项系统综述
Health Expect. 2025 Apr;28(2):e70252. doi: 10.1111/hex.70252.
9
Beliefs about medicines in pregnancy: a survey using the beliefs about medicines questionnaire in Indonesia.孕期用药观念:一项在印度尼西亚使用用药观念问卷进行的调查。
Int J Clin Pharm. 2020 Feb;42(1):57-64. doi: 10.1007/s11096-019-00937-w. Epub 2019 Nov 13.
10
Understanding factors influencing the implementation of medicine risk communications by healthcare professionals in clinical practice: a systematic review using the Theoretical Domains Framework.理解影响医疗保健专业人员在临床实践中实施医学风险沟通的因素:使用理论领域框架进行的系统评价。
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2024 Feb;20(2):86-98. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2023.10.004. Epub 2023 Oct 18.

本文引用的文献

1
Assessing patient information needs for new antidiabetic medications to inform shared decision-making: A best-worst scaling experiment in China.评估患者对新型抗糖尿病药物的信息需求,以促进共同决策:在中国开展的最佳最差标度实验。
Health Expect. 2024 Jun;27(3):e14059. doi: 10.1111/hex.14059.
2
Delivering Effective Messages in the Patient-Clinician Encounter.在医患交流中传递有效信息。
JAMA. 2024 Mar 5;331(9):792-793. doi: 10.1001/jama.2024.0371.
3
Experiences of shared decision making in acute hospitals: A mixed methods secondary analysis of the Irish National Inpatient Experience Survey.急性医院中共享决策的体验:对爱尔兰全国住院患者体验调查的混合方法二次分析。
Patient Educ Couns. 2023 Aug;113:107755. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.107755. Epub 2023 Apr 14.
4
Collaborative decision making is grounded in representations of other people's competence and effort.协作决策基于对他人能力和努力的表现。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2023 Jun;152(6):1565-1579. doi: 10.1037/xge0001336. Epub 2023 Mar 6.
5
When attitudes and beliefs get in the way of shared decision-making: A mediation analysis of participation preference.当态度和信念阻碍共同决策时:参与偏好的中介分析。
Health Expect. 2023 Apr;26(2):740-751. doi: 10.1111/hex.13699. Epub 2023 Jan 13.
6
Shared decision-making as a method of care.共同决策作为一种护理方法。
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2023 Aug;28(4):213-217. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2022-112068. Epub 2022 Dec 2.
7
Overconfidence in Managing Health Concerns: The Dunning-Kruger Effect and Health Literacy.对健康问题管理过于自信:邓宁-克鲁格效应与健康素养。
J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2023 Jun;30(2):460-468. doi: 10.1007/s10880-022-09895-4. Epub 2022 Jun 29.
8
Perspectives of residents on shared decision making in medication management: A qualitative study.居民对药物管理中共同决策的看法:一项定性研究。
Int Psychogeriatr. 2022 Oct;34(10):929-939. doi: 10.1017/S1041610222000205. Epub 2022 Mar 31.
9
Identifying and managing adverse drug reactions: Qualitative analysis of patient reports to the UK yellow card scheme.识别和管理药物不良反应:对英国黄卡计划中患者报告的定性分析。
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2022 Jul;88(7):3434-3446. doi: 10.1111/bcp.15263. Epub 2022 Mar 23.
10
Making sense of diabetes medication decisions: a mixed methods cluster randomized trial using a conversation aid intervention.理解糖尿病药物治疗决策:使用对话辅助干预的混合方法聚类随机试验。
Endocrine. 2022 Feb;75(2):377-391. doi: 10.1007/s12020-021-02861-4. Epub 2021 Sep 9.