Tools and Strategies to Integrate Multi-Domain Information for Personalized Decision-Making in Oncological Care Pathways: A Scoping Review

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Thanee M Uittenhout, Jesse Jansen, Kon-Siong Jie, Lieke Welling, Barbara L van Leeuwen, Leti van Bodegom-Vos, Anne M Stiggelbout, Trudy van der Weijden
{"title":"Tools and Strategies to Integrate Multi-Domain Information for Personalized Decision-Making in Oncological Care Pathways: A Scoping Review","authors":"Thanee M Uittenhout, Jesse Jansen, Kon-Siong Jie, Lieke Welling, Barbara L van Leeuwen, Leti van Bodegom-Vos, Anne M Stiggelbout, Trudy van der Weijden","doi":"10.2147/jmdh.s460499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<strong>Introduction:</strong> There is a growing interest in personalized decision-making in oncology. According to the Integrated Oncological Decision-Making Model (IODM), decisions should be based on information from three domains: (1) medical technical information, (2) patients’ general health status and (3) patients’ preferences and goals. Little is known about what kind of tool/strategy is used to collect the information, by whom this is collected (nurse, clinician) when this is collected (moment in the care pathway), and how this information should be collected and integrated within decision-making in oncological care pathways, and what its impact is.<br/><strong>Methods:</strong> We searched PUBMED, Embase and Web of Science in October 2023 for studies looking at tools to collect and integrate information from the three domains of the IODM. We extracted data on the content and implementation of these tools, and on decision and patient outcomes.<br/><strong>Results:</strong> The search yielded 2576 publications, of which only seven studies described collection of information from all three domains (inclusion criteria). In the seven included studies, information on the three domains was collected through dialogue, questionnaires, and assessments (what) by a nurse (2 out of 7 studies) or by other members of the Multi-Disciplinary Team (by whom) (5 out of 7 studies). Members of the Multi-Disciplinary Team subsequently integrated the information (5 out 7 studies) during their meeting (when), with patients and family attending this meeting in 2 studies (how). In terms of decision outcomes, 5 out of 7 studies compared the treatment recommendations before and after implementation of the tools, showing a modification of the treatment plan in 3% to 53% of cases. The limited data on patient outcomes suggest positive effects on well-being and fewer complications (3 out of 7 studies).<br/><strong>Conclusion:</strong> The seven studies identified that integrated information from the three IODM domains into treatment decision-making lacked comprehensive information regarding the strategies, process, timing and individuals involved in implementing the tools. Nevertheless, the few studies that looked at patient outcomes showed promising findings.<br/><br/><strong>Keywords:</strong> person centred care, patient centred care, patient preferences, treatment decision-making, multi-disciplinary team, oncology<br/>","PeriodicalId":16357,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/jmdh.s460499","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: There is a growing interest in personalized decision-making in oncology. According to the Integrated Oncological Decision-Making Model (IODM), decisions should be based on information from three domains: (1) medical technical information, (2) patients’ general health status and (3) patients’ preferences and goals. Little is known about what kind of tool/strategy is used to collect the information, by whom this is collected (nurse, clinician) when this is collected (moment in the care pathway), and how this information should be collected and integrated within decision-making in oncological care pathways, and what its impact is.
Methods: We searched PUBMED, Embase and Web of Science in October 2023 for studies looking at tools to collect and integrate information from the three domains of the IODM. We extracted data on the content and implementation of these tools, and on decision and patient outcomes.
Results: The search yielded 2576 publications, of which only seven studies described collection of information from all three domains (inclusion criteria). In the seven included studies, information on the three domains was collected through dialogue, questionnaires, and assessments (what) by a nurse (2 out of 7 studies) or by other members of the Multi-Disciplinary Team (by whom) (5 out of 7 studies). Members of the Multi-Disciplinary Team subsequently integrated the information (5 out 7 studies) during their meeting (when), with patients and family attending this meeting in 2 studies (how). In terms of decision outcomes, 5 out of 7 studies compared the treatment recommendations before and after implementation of the tools, showing a modification of the treatment plan in 3% to 53% of cases. The limited data on patient outcomes suggest positive effects on well-being and fewer complications (3 out of 7 studies).
Conclusion: The seven studies identified that integrated information from the three IODM domains into treatment decision-making lacked comprehensive information regarding the strategies, process, timing and individuals involved in implementing the tools. Nevertheless, the few studies that looked at patient outcomes showed promising findings.

Keywords: person centred care, patient centred care, patient preferences, treatment decision-making, multi-disciplinary team, oncology
在肿瘤治疗路径中整合多领域信息以进行个性化决策的工具和策略:范围综述
简介人们对肿瘤学中的个性化决策越来越感兴趣。根据综合肿瘤决策模型(IODM),决策应基于三个领域的信息:(1)医疗技术信息;(2)患者的总体健康状况;(3)患者的偏好和目标。关于使用何种工具/策略收集信息、由谁收集(护士、临床医生)、何时收集(护理路径中的某一时刻)、如何收集这些信息并将其纳入肿瘤护理路径的决策中,以及这些信息的影响,目前所知甚少:我们在 2023 年 10 月对 PUBMED、Embase 和 Web of Science 进行了检索,以了解有关收集和整合 IODM 三个领域信息的工具的研究。我们提取了有关这些工具的内容和实施情况以及决策和患者结果的数据:结果:搜索结果显示有 2576 篇出版物,其中只有七项研究描述了从所有三个领域收集信息的情况(纳入标准)。在纳入的七项研究中,护士(七项研究中的两项)或多学科团队的其他成员(由谁)(七项研究中的五项)通过对话、问卷调查和评估(什么)收集这三个领域的信息。多学科团队成员随后在会议上(何时)整合信息(7 项研究中的 5 项),2 项研究中的患者和家属参加了会议(如何)。在决策结果方面,7 项研究中有 5 项对工具使用前后的治疗建议进行了比较,结果显示 3% 至 53% 的病例修改了治疗方案。有关患者结果的有限数据表明,这些结果对患者的健康和减少并发症产生了积极影响(7 项研究中的 3 项):所发现的七项将三个 IODM 领域的信息纳入治疗决策的研究缺乏有关实施工具的策略、过程、时间和个人的全面信息。关键词:以人为本的护理、以患者为中心的护理、患者偏好、治疗决策、多学科团队、肿瘤学
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare Nursing-General Nursing
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
3.00%
发文量
287
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare (JMDH) aims to represent and publish research in healthcare areas delivered by practitioners of different disciplines. This includes studies and reviews conducted by multidisciplinary teams as well as research which evaluates or reports the results or conduct of such teams or healthcare processes in general. The journal covers a very wide range of areas and we welcome submissions from practitioners at all levels and from all over the world. Good healthcare is not bounded by person, place or time and the journal aims to reflect this. The JMDH is published as an open-access journal to allow this wide range of practical, patient relevant research to be immediately available to practitioners who can access and use it immediately upon publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信