全科医生对医疗保健决策辅助的看法:葡萄牙的一项定性研究。

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Mafalda Proença-Portugal, Bruno Heleno, Sónia Dias, Ana Gama, Sofia Baptista
{"title":"全科医生对医疗保健决策辅助的看法:葡萄牙的一项定性研究。","authors":"Mafalda Proença-Portugal, Bruno Heleno, Sónia Dias, Ana Gama, Sofia Baptista","doi":"10.1186/s12911-025-03044-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Decision aids (DA) are evidence-based tools that support health-related decisions. Despite their recognised value, the use of DAs in primary care remains modest. In Portugal, clinical guidelines focus on clinical decision-making with minimal patient engagement. Adapting international DAs to the Portuguese context could be an efficient way to support the transition to shared decision-making. Understanding general practitioners' (GPs) awareness and perceptions of DAs is essential before evaluating their willingness to adopt these tools for specific clinical problems.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore Portuguese GPs' perceptions of DAs and their implementation in primary care.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Qualitative study with GPs and GP trainees in Portugal. Seven online focus groups were conducted with 33 GPs and GP trainees selected through purposive sampling. Data were analysed using deductive content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most participants initially confused DAs with clinical decision support tools; only one recognised them as aids for shared decision-making. After clarification, GPs expressed favourable attitudes and believed that patients were willing to use DAs. Key barriers to adoption included limited funding, time constraints, and the lack of Portuguese translations. Facilitators involved system integration and localisation. Priority topics centred on prevention (screening, statin use, vaccines, contraception, lifestyle changes) and specific medications (antibiotics, hormone replacement, psychotropics).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although unfamiliar to most participants, integrating DAs in primary care was well received, and these tools may provide added value in improving the quality of health decisions.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>","PeriodicalId":9340,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","volume":"25 1","pages":"202"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12131423/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"General practitioners' perceptions on decision aids in healthcare: a qualitative study in Portugal.\",\"authors\":\"Mafalda Proença-Portugal, Bruno Heleno, Sónia Dias, Ana Gama, Sofia Baptista\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12911-025-03044-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Decision aids (DA) are evidence-based tools that support health-related decisions. Despite their recognised value, the use of DAs in primary care remains modest. In Portugal, clinical guidelines focus on clinical decision-making with minimal patient engagement. Adapting international DAs to the Portuguese context could be an efficient way to support the transition to shared decision-making. Understanding general practitioners' (GPs) awareness and perceptions of DAs is essential before evaluating their willingness to adopt these tools for specific clinical problems.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore Portuguese GPs' perceptions of DAs and their implementation in primary care.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Qualitative study with GPs and GP trainees in Portugal. Seven online focus groups were conducted with 33 GPs and GP trainees selected through purposive sampling. Data were analysed using deductive content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most participants initially confused DAs with clinical decision support tools; only one recognised them as aids for shared decision-making. After clarification, GPs expressed favourable attitudes and believed that patients were willing to use DAs. Key barriers to adoption included limited funding, time constraints, and the lack of Portuguese translations. Facilitators involved system integration and localisation. Priority topics centred on prevention (screening, statin use, vaccines, contraception, lifestyle changes) and specific medications (antibiotics, hormone replacement, psychotropics).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although unfamiliar to most participants, integrating DAs in primary care was well received, and these tools may provide added value in improving the quality of health decisions.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial number: </strong>Not applicable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9340,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"202\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12131423/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-025-03044-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL INFORMATICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-025-03044-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:决策辅助工具(DA)是支持健康相关决策的循证工具。尽管它们具有公认的价值,但在初级保健中的应用仍然有限。在葡萄牙,临床指南侧重于临床决策,患者参与度最低。使国际发展议程适应葡萄牙的情况,可能是支持向共同决策过渡的有效途径。在评估全科医生是否愿意采用这些工具来解决特定的临床问题之前,了解全科医生对DAs的认识和认知是至关重要的。目的:探讨葡萄牙全科医生对DAs的看法及其在初级保健中的实施。方法:对葡萄牙全科医生及全科实习生进行定性研究。通过有目的抽样,选取全科医生和全科实习生33人,进行了7个在线焦点小组。数据分析采用演绎内容分析。结果:大多数参与者最初将DAs与临床决策支持工具混淆;只有一个国家承认它们是共同决策的辅助工具。经过澄清,全科医生表达了良好的态度,认为患者愿意使用DAs。采用的主要障碍包括资金有限、时间限制和缺乏葡萄牙语翻译。促进者涉及系统集成和本地化。优先主题集中于预防(筛查、他汀类药物的使用、疫苗、避孕、改变生活方式)和特定药物(抗生素、激素替代、精神药物)。结论:虽然大多数参与者不熟悉,但将DAs整合到初级保健中是很受欢迎的,这些工具可能在提高健康决策质量方面提供附加价值。临床试验号:不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
General practitioners' perceptions on decision aids in healthcare: a qualitative study in Portugal.

Background: Decision aids (DA) are evidence-based tools that support health-related decisions. Despite their recognised value, the use of DAs in primary care remains modest. In Portugal, clinical guidelines focus on clinical decision-making with minimal patient engagement. Adapting international DAs to the Portuguese context could be an efficient way to support the transition to shared decision-making. Understanding general practitioners' (GPs) awareness and perceptions of DAs is essential before evaluating their willingness to adopt these tools for specific clinical problems.

Aim: To explore Portuguese GPs' perceptions of DAs and their implementation in primary care.

Method: Qualitative study with GPs and GP trainees in Portugal. Seven online focus groups were conducted with 33 GPs and GP trainees selected through purposive sampling. Data were analysed using deductive content analysis.

Results: Most participants initially confused DAs with clinical decision support tools; only one recognised them as aids for shared decision-making. After clarification, GPs expressed favourable attitudes and believed that patients were willing to use DAs. Key barriers to adoption included limited funding, time constraints, and the lack of Portuguese translations. Facilitators involved system integration and localisation. Priority topics centred on prevention (screening, statin use, vaccines, contraception, lifestyle changes) and specific medications (antibiotics, hormone replacement, psychotropics).

Conclusion: Although unfamiliar to most participants, integrating DAs in primary care was well received, and these tools may provide added value in improving the quality of health decisions.

Clinical trial number: Not applicable.

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
7.20
自引率
5.70%
发文量
297
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the design, development, implementation, use, and evaluation of health information technologies and decision-making for human health.
×
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