• 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

将患者对共同决策的认知与肺癌筛查决策中的满意度相联系。

Linking Patient Perceptions of Shared Decision Making to Satisfaction in Lung Cancer Screening Decisions.

作者信息

Robinson Stephanie A, Barker Anna M, Fix Gemmae M, Clayman Marla L, Herbst Abigail N, White Julie C, Wiener Renda Soylemez

机构信息

Center for Health Optimization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA.

The Pulmonary Center, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Med Decis Making. 2025 Jul;45(5):522-532. doi: 10.1177/0272989X251333451. Epub 2025 Apr 28.

DOI:10.1177/0272989X251333451
PMID:40292863
Abstract

IntroductionLung cancer is especially prevalent among US veterans, and lung cancer mortality can be reduced through lung cancer screening (LCS). LCS guidelines recommend shared decision making (SDM) to help patients weigh the benefits and harms of LCS and make informed, values-based decisions about screening. Yet some question whether SDM affects patient outcomes. This study evaluated US veterans' perceptions of LCS SDM quality and its relationship with satisfaction in LCS decisions.MethodsWe administered surveys via mail and phone to veterans in the VA New England Healthcare Network after recent LCS conversations. SDM quality was measured using CollaboRATE, with top scores indicating high quality. Decision satisfaction was assessed using the Satisfaction with Decision scale. Generalized linear models analyzed associations between perceived SDM quality and decision satisfaction, adjusting for demographics, health, and overall care satisfaction.ResultsAmong 1,033 patients who received surveys, 320 responded (31.0%), with 220 recalling the LCS conversation. Among those who answered the CollaboRATE questions, 34.0% (73/215) perceived SDM to be high quality ("top scorers"). Perceived high-quality SDM was significantly associated with greater decision satisfaction compared with lower perceived SDM quality (adjusted mean satisfaction on a 30-point scale = 26.75 v. 24.23; < 0.001). A greater proportion of patients who received, versus did not receive, patient education materials rated SDM as high quality (44.4% v. 27.7%, = 0.018).LimitationsThe sample was primarily White, male, and all US veterans, limiting generalizability to other LCS-eligible cohorts. The cross-sectional design prevents causal inferences and long-term follow-up.ConclusionsHigher perceived SDM quality was associated with greater patient satisfaction with the LCS decision. Improving SDM processes can enhance patient engagement and may improve LCS adherence and health outcomes.HighlightsHigher perceived shared decision making (SDM) quality in lung cancer screening (LCS) discussions leads to greater patient satisfaction with screening decisions.While the use of patient education materials was linked to higher perceived SDM quality, less than half of patients who received materials rated SDM as high quality. There remains room for improved design and delivery to ensure materials effectively support the SDM process and guidance to providers on how to effectively incorporate patient educational materials to support, rather than replace, high-quality SDM conversations.Enhancing SDM processes and aligning them with patient preferences can support patient satisfaction with their decision, which may have downstream benefits to patient engagement, adherence, and improved outcomes.

摘要

引言

肺癌在美国退伍军人中尤为普遍,而肺癌筛查(LCS)可降低肺癌死亡率。LCS指南建议采用共同决策(SDM),以帮助患者权衡LCS的利弊,并就筛查做出基于自身价值观的明智决策。然而,有人质疑SDM是否会影响患者的结局。本研究评估了美国退伍军人对LCS中SDM质量的看法及其与LCS决策满意度的关系。

方法

在最近的LCS对话后,我们通过邮件和电话对新英格兰退伍军人事务医疗网络中的退伍军人进行了调查。使用CollaboRATE量表来衡量SDM质量,高分表示高质量。使用决策满意度量表评估决策满意度。采用广义线性模型分析感知到的SDM质量与决策满意度之间的关联,并对人口统计学、健康状况和总体护理满意度进行了调整。

结果

在1033名接受调查的患者中,320人做出了回应(31.0%),其中220人回忆起了LCS对话。在回答CollaboRATE问题的患者中,34.0%(73/215)认为SDM质量高(“高分者”)。与较低的感知SDM质量相比,感知到的高质量SDM与更高的决策满意度显著相关(30分制的调整后平均满意度 = 26.75对24.23;P < 0.001)。与未收到患者教育材料的患者相比,收到患者教育材料的患者中,认为SDM质量高的比例更高(44.4%对27.7%,P = 0.018)。

局限性

样本主要为白人、男性且均为美国退伍军人,限制了其对其他符合LCS条件人群的普遍性。横断面设计无法进行因果推断和长期随访。

结论

更高的感知SDM质量与患者对LCS决策的更高满意度相关。改进SDM流程可以增强患者参与度,并可能提高LCS的依从性和健康结局。

要点

在肺癌筛查(LCS)讨论中,更高的感知共同决策(SDM)质量会导致患者对筛查决策的更高满意度。

虽然使用患者教育材料与更高的感知SDM质量相关,但收到材料的患者中不到一半认为SDM质量高。在设计和提供方面仍有改进空间,以确保材料有效地支持SDM流程,并为提供者提供关于如何有效纳入患者教育材料以支持而非取代高质量SDM对话的指导。

加强SDM流程并使其与患者偏好保持一致,可以支持患者对其决策的满意度,这可能对患者参与度、依从性和改善结局产生下游益处。

相似文献

1
Linking Patient Perceptions of Shared Decision Making to Satisfaction in Lung Cancer Screening Decisions.将患者对共同决策的认知与肺癌筛查决策中的满意度相联系。
Med Decis Making. 2025 Jul;45(5):522-532. doi: 10.1177/0272989X251333451. Epub 2025 Apr 28.
2
Shared decision-making for people with asthma.哮喘患者的共同决策
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Oct 3;10(10):CD012330. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012330.pub2.
3
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.
4
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.
5
Sexual Harassment and Prevention Training性骚扰与预防培训
6
Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals.提高医疗保健专业人员采用共同决策的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 May 12(5):CD006732. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006732.pub2.
7
Interventions for supporting pregnant women's decision-making about mode of birth after a caesarean.支持剖宫产术后孕妇做出分娩方式决策的干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jul 30;2013(7):CD010041. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010041.pub2.
8
Examining How Technology Supports Shared Decision-Making in Oncology Consultations: Qualitative Thematic Analysis.审视技术如何支持肿瘤学会诊中的共同决策:定性主题分析
JMIR Cancer. 2025 Jun 11;11:e70827. doi: 10.2196/70827.
9
Falls prevention interventions for community-dwelling older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits, harms, and patient values and preferences.社区居住的老年人跌倒预防干预措施:系统评价和荟萃分析的益处、危害以及患者的价值观和偏好。
Syst Rev. 2024 Nov 26;13(1):289. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02681-3.
10
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.为面临医疗治疗或筛查决策的人们提供的决策辅助工具。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Oct 5(10):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub3.