虚拟医疗中共同决策的挑战:我们应该照顾谁,如何照顾?

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Lujia Sun , Martin Buijsen
{"title":"虚拟医疗中共同决策的挑战:我们应该照顾谁,如何照顾?","authors":"Lujia Sun ,&nbsp;Martin Buijsen","doi":"10.1016/j.hlpt.2024.100931","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This article examines challenges in implementing shared decision-making within virtual care. Virtual care platforms emphasise quick delivery, patient choice and empowerment, offering convenient access to remote medical consultations at patients’ homes. However, shared decision-making is a collaborative and deliberative process that does not prioritise efficiency and individual decisions over the principles of sound medical practice. Recognised as the gold standard in healthcare, extending shared decision-making to virtual care platforms is indispensable, but it would encounter difficulties in implementation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Combining an empirical methodology with ethical reasoning, an integrated approach facilitates critical discourse on shared decision-making within virtual care settings. This involves an ethical premise concerning shared decision-making norms, followed by an ethical analysis drawing upon empirical findings from literature via keyword searches. Adopting an interdisciplinary perspective, the study merges ethical and social viewpoints to elucidate shared decision-making’s significance and policy implications in virtual care.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The investigation identifies four significant factors that may challenge implementing shared decision-making within virtual care contexts. These include consumer-like behaviours, the absence of pre-existing relationships, information expansion, and physicians’ evolving roles.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>It is concluded that a collaborative approach to a caring relationship that focuses on patients’ needs and values, continuity of care, and medical professionalism is essential to this new integration of virtual care and shared decision-making.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48672,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy and Technology","volume":"13 6","pages":"Article 100931"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Challenges of shared decision-making in virtual care: Whom should we care for, and how?\",\"authors\":\"Lujia Sun ,&nbsp;Martin Buijsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hlpt.2024.100931\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This article examines challenges in implementing shared decision-making within virtual care. Virtual care platforms emphasise quick delivery, patient choice and empowerment, offering convenient access to remote medical consultations at patients’ homes. However, shared decision-making is a collaborative and deliberative process that does not prioritise efficiency and individual decisions over the principles of sound medical practice. Recognised as the gold standard in healthcare, extending shared decision-making to virtual care platforms is indispensable, but it would encounter difficulties in implementation.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Combining an empirical methodology with ethical reasoning, an integrated approach facilitates critical discourse on shared decision-making within virtual care settings. This involves an ethical premise concerning shared decision-making norms, followed by an ethical analysis drawing upon empirical findings from literature via keyword searches. Adopting an interdisciplinary perspective, the study merges ethical and social viewpoints to elucidate shared decision-making’s significance and policy implications in virtual care.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The investigation identifies four significant factors that may challenge implementing shared decision-making within virtual care contexts. These include consumer-like behaviours, the absence of pre-existing relationships, information expansion, and physicians’ evolving roles.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>It is concluded that a collaborative approach to a caring relationship that focuses on patients’ needs and values, continuity of care, and medical professionalism is essential to this new integration of virtual care and shared decision-making.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Policy and Technology\",\"volume\":\"13 6\",\"pages\":\"Article 100931\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Policy and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883724000947\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883724000947","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本文探讨了在虚拟医疗中实施共享决策的挑战。虚拟护理平台强调快速交付、患者选择和赋权,为患者提供方便的远程医疗咨询。然而,共同决策是一种协作和审议过程,不将效率和个人决定置于健全医疗实践原则之上。作为医疗保健领域的黄金标准,将共享决策扩展到虚拟医疗平台是必不可少的,但在实施过程中会遇到困难。方法将经验方法与道德推理相结合,综合方法促进了虚拟护理环境中共享决策的关键话语。这涉及到一个关于共同决策规范的伦理前提,然后是通过关键词搜索从文献中得出的实证结果进行伦理分析。本研究采用跨学科的观点,将伦理和社会观点结合起来,阐明虚拟医疗中共同决策的意义和政策含义。结果调查确定了四个可能挑战在虚拟护理环境中实施共同决策的重要因素。这些因素包括消费者行为、缺乏预先存在的关系、信息扩展以及医生角色的演变。结论:在虚拟医疗和共同决策的新整合中,注重患者需求和价值观、护理连续性和医疗专业精神的协作方式是至关重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Challenges of shared decision-making in virtual care: Whom should we care for, and how?

Objective

This article examines challenges in implementing shared decision-making within virtual care. Virtual care platforms emphasise quick delivery, patient choice and empowerment, offering convenient access to remote medical consultations at patients’ homes. However, shared decision-making is a collaborative and deliberative process that does not prioritise efficiency and individual decisions over the principles of sound medical practice. Recognised as the gold standard in healthcare, extending shared decision-making to virtual care platforms is indispensable, but it would encounter difficulties in implementation.

Methods

Combining an empirical methodology with ethical reasoning, an integrated approach facilitates critical discourse on shared decision-making within virtual care settings. This involves an ethical premise concerning shared decision-making norms, followed by an ethical analysis drawing upon empirical findings from literature via keyword searches. Adopting an interdisciplinary perspective, the study merges ethical and social viewpoints to elucidate shared decision-making’s significance and policy implications in virtual care.

Results

The investigation identifies four significant factors that may challenge implementing shared decision-making within virtual care contexts. These include consumer-like behaviours, the absence of pre-existing relationships, information expansion, and physicians’ evolving roles.

Conclusions

It is concluded that a collaborative approach to a caring relationship that focuses on patients’ needs and values, continuity of care, and medical professionalism is essential to this new integration of virtual care and shared decision-making.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Policy and Technology
Health Policy and Technology Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
78
审稿时长
88 days
期刊介绍: Health Policy and Technology (HPT), is the official journal of the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine (FPM), a cross-disciplinary journal, which focuses on past, present and future health policy and the role of technology in clinical and non-clinical national and international health environments. HPT provides a further excellent way for the FPM to continue to make important national and international contributions to development of policy and practice within medicine and related disciplines. The aim of HPT is to publish relevant, timely and accessible articles and commentaries to support policy-makers, health professionals, health technology providers, patient groups and academia interested in health policy and technology. Topics covered by HPT will include: - Health technology, including drug discovery, diagnostics, medicines, devices, therapeutic delivery and eHealth systems - Cross-national comparisons on health policy using evidence-based approaches - National studies on health policy to determine the outcomes of technology-driven initiatives - Cross-border eHealth including health tourism - The digital divide in mobility, access and affordability of healthcare - Health technology assessment (HTA) methods and tools for evaluating the effectiveness of clinical and non-clinical health technologies - Health and eHealth indicators and benchmarks (measure/metrics) for understanding the adoption and diffusion of health technologies - Health and eHealth models and frameworks to support policy-makers and other stakeholders in decision-making - Stakeholder engagement with health technologies (clinical and patient/citizen buy-in) - Regulation and health economics
×
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