菲律宾肿瘤学家和肿瘤相关专业人员关于共同决策的知识、态度和实践的全国调查。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Francis Matthew Pleta, Reigen Placido, Delfin Yñigo Pilapil, Ma Dianne Parado, Amanda Pauline Paris, Neil Joshua Patiag, Alfonzo Martin Pedro, Julia Audrey Peralta, Regis Patrick Pilar, Herdee Gloriane Luna, Warren Bacorro
{"title":"菲律宾肿瘤学家和肿瘤相关专业人员关于共同决策的知识、态度和实践的全国调查。","authors":"Francis Matthew Pleta, Reigen Placido, Delfin Yñigo Pilapil, Ma Dianne Parado, Amanda Pauline Paris, Neil Joshua Patiag, Alfonzo Martin Pedro, Julia Audrey Peralta, Regis Patrick Pilar, Herdee Gloriane Luna, Warren Bacorro","doi":"10.1111/ajco.14178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Filipino oncologists and oncology-related professionals on shared decision making (SDM), evaluate their familiarity with and use of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and clinical practice guidelines (CPG), and identify barriers and facilitators to SDM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional, nationwide online survey was conducted from April 1 to May 15, 2024, using voluntary response sampling.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>87 respondents participated. Most practice in the National Capital Region (NCR) (n = 48, 55%), Luzon (outside NCR) (n = 22, 25%), Mindanao (n = 11, 13%), and Visayas (n = 8, 9%); 56 (64%) practice in both government and private centers. Most lacked a full conceptual understanding of SDM. Almost all had a positive attitude toward its implementation. 62 (71%) indicated that they share responsibility with their patients for making decisions. The top reason for not applying SDM in appropriate situations was patient deference to the clinician's decision (n = 37, 43%). Choosing among treatment options with equivalent effectiveness but different toxicity profiles (n = 86, 99%) was the most reported situation deemed appropriate for SDM. Key barriers to SDM implementation were patient-related factors, family dynamics, health financing, and time constraints. Several expressed the need for adequate time and effective communication to facilitate SDM.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most surveyed Filipino oncologists and oncology-related professionals reported applying SDM and had a positive attitude toward it. However, a fuller conceptual understanding of the process is lacking. Patient-, family-, and health financing-related barriers were identified. Enhancing SDM education among oncologists may improve the clinical application, and exploring the perspectives of other stakeholders may enhance its institutionalization.</p>","PeriodicalId":8633,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Nationwide Survey on Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Filipino Oncologists and Oncology-Related Professionals on Shared Decision Making.\",\"authors\":\"Francis Matthew Pleta, Reigen Placido, Delfin Yñigo Pilapil, Ma Dianne Parado, Amanda Pauline Paris, Neil Joshua Patiag, Alfonzo Martin Pedro, Julia Audrey Peralta, Regis Patrick Pilar, Herdee Gloriane Luna, Warren Bacorro\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajco.14178\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Filipino oncologists and oncology-related professionals on shared decision making (SDM), evaluate their familiarity with and use of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and clinical practice guidelines (CPG), and identify barriers and facilitators to SDM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional, nationwide online survey was conducted from April 1 to May 15, 2024, using voluntary response sampling.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>87 respondents participated. Most practice in the National Capital Region (NCR) (n = 48, 55%), Luzon (outside NCR) (n = 22, 25%), Mindanao (n = 11, 13%), and Visayas (n = 8, 9%); 56 (64%) practice in both government and private centers. Most lacked a full conceptual understanding of SDM. Almost all had a positive attitude toward its implementation. 62 (71%) indicated that they share responsibility with their patients for making decisions. The top reason for not applying SDM in appropriate situations was patient deference to the clinician's decision (n = 37, 43%). Choosing among treatment options with equivalent effectiveness but different toxicity profiles (n = 86, 99%) was the most reported situation deemed appropriate for SDM. Key barriers to SDM implementation were patient-related factors, family dynamics, health financing, and time constraints. Several expressed the need for adequate time and effective communication to facilitate SDM.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most surveyed Filipino oncologists and oncology-related professionals reported applying SDM and had a positive attitude toward it. However, a fuller conceptual understanding of the process is lacking. Patient-, family-, and health financing-related barriers were identified. Enhancing SDM education among oncologists may improve the clinical application, and exploring the perspectives of other stakeholders may enhance its institutionalization.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8633,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajco.14178\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajco.14178","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:探讨菲律宾肿瘤学家和肿瘤学相关专业人员在共享决策(SDM)方面的知识、态度和实践,评估他们对循证医学(EBM)和临床实践指南(CPG)的熟悉程度和使用情况,并确定SDM的障碍和促进因素。方法:采用自愿抽样方式,于2024年4月1日至5月15日在全国范围内进行横断面在线调查。结果:87人参与。大多数做法发生在国家首都地区(NCR) (n = 48.55%)、吕宋岛(NCR以外)(n = 22.25%)、棉兰老岛(n = 11.13%)和米沙鄢群岛(n = 8.9%);56人(64%)在政府和私人中心执业。大多数人对SDM缺乏完整的概念理解。几乎所有人都对其实施持积极态度。62位(71%)表示他们与患者共同承担决策责任。在适当情况下不应用SDM的首要原因是患者对临床医生决定的服从(n = 37, 43%)。在疗效相当但毒性不同(n = 86,99%)的治疗方案中进行选择是最适合SDM的报告情况。实施可持续发展目标的主要障碍是与患者有关的因素、家庭动态、卫生筹资和时间限制。有几位代表表示需要有足够的时间和有效的沟通来促进可持续发展机制。结论:受访的菲律宾肿瘤医师和肿瘤相关专业人员中,大多数报告使用SDM,并对其持积极态度。然而,缺乏对这一过程更全面的概念性理解。确定了患者、家庭和健康融资相关的障碍。加强肿瘤学家的SDM教育可以提高临床应用,探索其他利益相关者的观点可以提高其制度化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Nationwide Survey on Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Filipino Oncologists and Oncology-Related Professionals on Shared Decision Making.

Aim: To explore the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Filipino oncologists and oncology-related professionals on shared decision making (SDM), evaluate their familiarity with and use of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and clinical practice guidelines (CPG), and identify barriers and facilitators to SDM.

Methods: A cross-sectional, nationwide online survey was conducted from April 1 to May 15, 2024, using voluntary response sampling.

Results: 87 respondents participated. Most practice in the National Capital Region (NCR) (n = 48, 55%), Luzon (outside NCR) (n = 22, 25%), Mindanao (n = 11, 13%), and Visayas (n = 8, 9%); 56 (64%) practice in both government and private centers. Most lacked a full conceptual understanding of SDM. Almost all had a positive attitude toward its implementation. 62 (71%) indicated that they share responsibility with their patients for making decisions. The top reason for not applying SDM in appropriate situations was patient deference to the clinician's decision (n = 37, 43%). Choosing among treatment options with equivalent effectiveness but different toxicity profiles (n = 86, 99%) was the most reported situation deemed appropriate for SDM. Key barriers to SDM implementation were patient-related factors, family dynamics, health financing, and time constraints. Several expressed the need for adequate time and effective communication to facilitate SDM.

Conclusion: Most surveyed Filipino oncologists and oncology-related professionals reported applying SDM and had a positive attitude toward it. However, a fuller conceptual understanding of the process is lacking. Patient-, family-, and health financing-related barriers were identified. Enhancing SDM education among oncologists may improve the clinical application, and exploring the perspectives of other stakeholders may enhance its institutionalization.

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
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
175
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Asia–Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology is a multidisciplinary journal of oncology that aims to be a forum for facilitating collaboration and exchanging information on what is happening in different countries of the Asia–Pacific region in relation to cancer treatment and care. The Journal is ideally positioned to receive publications that deal with diversity in cancer behavior, management and outcome related to ethnic, cultural, economic and other differences between populations. In addition to original articles, the Journal publishes reviews, editorials, letters to the Editor and short communications. Case reports are generally not considered for publication, only exceptional papers in which Editors find extraordinary oncological value may be considered for review. The Journal encourages clinical studies, particularly prospectively designed clinical trials.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信