从理想主义者到现实主义者——在精神病患者抗精神病药物处方选择中设计和实施共享决策干预(SHAPE):现实主义回顾。

IF 4.8 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Ita Fitzgerald, Laura J Sahm, Ian Maidment, Emma Wallace, Yaara Zisman-Ilani, Mikkel Højlund, Sarah O'Dwyer, Ciara Ní Dhubhlaing, Erin K Crowley, Jo Howe
{"title":"从理想主义者到现实主义者——在精神病患者抗精神病药物处方选择中设计和实施共享决策干预(SHAPE):现实主义回顾。","authors":"Ita Fitzgerald, Laura J Sahm, Ian Maidment, Emma Wallace, Yaara Zisman-Ilani, Mikkel Højlund, Sarah O'Dwyer, Ciara Ní Dhubhlaing, Erin K Crowley, Jo Howe","doi":"10.1093/schbul/sbaf058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Shared decision-making (SDM) implementation remains limited in psychosis management, particularly within antipsychotic prescribing. When and why prescribers engage in SDM within these contexts is largely unknown. Part 1 of this two-part realist review aimed to understand the impact of structural and contextual factors on prescriber engagement in SDM within antipsychotic prescribing.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Library, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for evidence to develop realist program theories outlining the relationship between macro-level contexts and their impact on prescriber behaviors.</p><p><strong>Study results: </strong>From 106 included documents, five program theories explaining relationships between (i) leadership and governance, (ii) workforce development, and (iii) service delivery contexts and their impact on reducing prescriber engagement with behaviors required of SDM application were developed. No facilitative macro-level contexts were identified. Key mechanisms reducing prescriber engagement in desired behaviors include fear of individual blame for adverse outcomes and exposure to liability, pressure from service environments to prioritize decreasing risk of harm, devaluing of experiential knowledge, and beliefs that SDM conflicts with duties of beneficence and non-maleficence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Even empirically efficacious interventions will be difficult to implement at scale within real-world settings due to misalignment with complex cultural, legal, and professional realities prominent therein. Mechanisms responsible for reducing prescriber engagement in SDM should be the target of structural interventions necessary to support contextual integration into psychosis management. Part 2 outlines features of service delivery contexts, workforce development, and technology that can increase prescriber engagement in SDM.</p>","PeriodicalId":21530,"journal":{"name":"Schizophrenia Bulletin","volume":" ","pages":"916-932"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12236316/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Idealist to Realist-Designing and Implementing Shared Decision-Making Interventions in the Choice of Antipsychotic Prescription in People Living with Psychosis (SHAPE): A Realist Review.\",\"authors\":\"Ita Fitzgerald, Laura J Sahm, Ian Maidment, Emma Wallace, Yaara Zisman-Ilani, Mikkel Højlund, Sarah O'Dwyer, Ciara Ní Dhubhlaing, Erin K Crowley, Jo Howe\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/schbul/sbaf058\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Shared decision-making (SDM) implementation remains limited in psychosis management, particularly within antipsychotic prescribing. When and why prescribers engage in SDM within these contexts is largely unknown. Part 1 of this two-part realist review aimed to understand the impact of structural and contextual factors on prescriber engagement in SDM within antipsychotic prescribing.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Library, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for evidence to develop realist program theories outlining the relationship between macro-level contexts and their impact on prescriber behaviors.</p><p><strong>Study results: </strong>From 106 included documents, five program theories explaining relationships between (i) leadership and governance, (ii) workforce development, and (iii) service delivery contexts and their impact on reducing prescriber engagement with behaviors required of SDM application were developed. No facilitative macro-level contexts were identified. Key mechanisms reducing prescriber engagement in desired behaviors include fear of individual blame for adverse outcomes and exposure to liability, pressure from service environments to prioritize decreasing risk of harm, devaluing of experiential knowledge, and beliefs that SDM conflicts with duties of beneficence and non-maleficence.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Even empirically efficacious interventions will be difficult to implement at scale within real-world settings due to misalignment with complex cultural, legal, and professional realities prominent therein. Mechanisms responsible for reducing prescriber engagement in SDM should be the target of structural interventions necessary to support contextual integration into psychosis management. Part 2 outlines features of service delivery contexts, workforce development, and technology that can increase prescriber engagement in SDM.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21530,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Schizophrenia Bulletin\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"916-932\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12236316/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Schizophrenia Bulletin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbaf058\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Schizophrenia Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbaf058","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:共享决策(SDM)的实施在精神病管理中仍然有限,特别是在抗精神病药物处方中。在这些情况下,处方医生何时以及为何使用SDM在很大程度上是未知的。这两部分现实主义回顾的第一部分旨在了解结构和背景因素对抗精神病药物处方中SDM处方者参与的影响。研究设计:检索CINAHL Plus、Cochrane Library、Embase、PsycINFO、PubMed、Scopus、Sociological Abstracts、Web of Science和谷歌Scholar,寻找证据来发展现实主义程序理论,概述宏观层面背景及其对处方者行为的影响之间的关系。研究结果:从106个纳入的文件中,开发了五个程序理论,解释了(i)领导与治理、(ii)劳动力发展和(iii)服务交付环境之间的关系,以及它们对减少处方者参与SDM应用所需行为的影响。没有确定具有促进作用的宏观级别上下文。减少处方者参与期望行为的关键机制包括:担心个人对不良结果的指责和承担责任,服务环境要求优先降低伤害风险的压力,经验知识的贬值,以及SDM与慈善和非恶意义务相冲突的信念。结论:即使是经验上有效的干预措施,由于与其中突出的复杂文化、法律和专业现实不一致,也很难在现实环境中大规模实施。减少处方者参与SDM的机制应该成为结构性干预的目标,以支持将情境整合到精神病管理中。第2部分概述了服务交付环境、劳动力开发和技术的特征,这些特征可以提高处方者在SDM中的参与度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From Idealist to Realist-Designing and Implementing Shared Decision-Making Interventions in the Choice of Antipsychotic Prescription in People Living with Psychosis (SHAPE): A Realist Review.

Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) implementation remains limited in psychosis management, particularly within antipsychotic prescribing. When and why prescribers engage in SDM within these contexts is largely unknown. Part 1 of this two-part realist review aimed to understand the impact of structural and contextual factors on prescriber engagement in SDM within antipsychotic prescribing.

Study design: CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Library, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, Sociological Abstracts, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for evidence to develop realist program theories outlining the relationship between macro-level contexts and their impact on prescriber behaviors.

Study results: From 106 included documents, five program theories explaining relationships between (i) leadership and governance, (ii) workforce development, and (iii) service delivery contexts and their impact on reducing prescriber engagement with behaviors required of SDM application were developed. No facilitative macro-level contexts were identified. Key mechanisms reducing prescriber engagement in desired behaviors include fear of individual blame for adverse outcomes and exposure to liability, pressure from service environments to prioritize decreasing risk of harm, devaluing of experiential knowledge, and beliefs that SDM conflicts with duties of beneficence and non-maleficence.

Conclusion: Even empirically efficacious interventions will be difficult to implement at scale within real-world settings due to misalignment with complex cultural, legal, and professional realities prominent therein. Mechanisms responsible for reducing prescriber engagement in SDM should be the target of structural interventions necessary to support contextual integration into psychosis management. Part 2 outlines features of service delivery contexts, workforce development, and technology that can increase prescriber engagement in SDM.

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
Schizophrenia Bulletin
Schizophrenia Bulletin 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
6.10%
发文量
163
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Schizophrenia Bulletin seeks to review recent developments and empirically based hypotheses regarding the etiology and treatment of schizophrenia. We view the field as broad and deep, and will publish new knowledge ranging from the molecular basis to social and cultural factors. We will give new emphasis to translational reports which simultaneously highlight basic neurobiological mechanisms and clinical manifestations. Some of the Bulletin content is invited as special features or manuscripts organized as a theme by special guest editors. Most pages of the Bulletin are devoted to unsolicited manuscripts of high quality that report original data or where we can provide a special venue for a major study or workshop report. Supplement issues are sometimes provided for manuscripts reporting from a recent conference.
×
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