医学生对医生劝导患者的态度与经验:阐明共同决策的伦理。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
John Muckler, James C Thomas, Laura Shinkunas, Lauris C Kaldjian
{"title":"医学生对医生劝导患者的态度与经验:阐明共同决策的伦理。","authors":"John Muckler, James C Thomas, Laura Shinkunas, Lauris C Kaldjian","doi":"10.1007/s11606-025-09807-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ethical principles of autonomy and beneficence guide clinical decision making. Little is known about how clinicians prioritize these principles and integrate them with virtue ethics when assessing the ethics of persuasion.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Survey medical students about their attitudes and experiences regarding the use of persuasion by physicians in shared decision making.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional, on-line survey.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Pre-clinical and clinical medical students at one US medical school.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Survey instrument contained 31 items including a three-part clinical vignette, attitudes toward persuasion and ethical principles, experiences observing or participating in persuasion, and demographic information. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were performed, including LASSO regression using a 30-point persuasion score derived from six items.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>237 students completed the survey (45% response rate). In general, 55.7% supported persuasion by physicians for the good of the patient's health. Nearly half supported persuasion for an at-risk cardiovascular patient who declines recommendations for walking or statin treatment; 64.1% supported persuasion for a patient with myocardial infarction who wants to leave the hospital against medical advice. While 70.0% believed persuasion is appropriate because it promotes beneficence and nonmaleficence, 16.9% believed persuasion is inappropriate because it disrespects patient autonomy. Most students (81.0%) had seen a good physician role model for persuasion, and 38.0% had willingly participated in persuasion. LASSO regression identified four items contributing positively to the persuasion score (belief that persuasion promotes beneficence/nonmaleficence, observation of a good role model, experience participating in persuasion, male gender) and two negatively (belief that persuasion disrespects patient autonomy, observation of inappropriate use of persuasion).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Medical students vary in attitudes toward persuasion of patients by physicians, and variations are associated with differences in ethical beliefs, clinical experiences, and gender. Education regarding the use of persuasion should address ethical justification, experience, and role-modeling-which can be encompassed by virtue ethics.</p>","PeriodicalId":15860,"journal":{"name":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medical Students' Attitudes and Experiences Regarding Persuasion of Patients by Physicians: Clarifying the Ethics of Shared Decision Making.\",\"authors\":\"John Muckler, James C Thomas, Laura Shinkunas, Lauris C Kaldjian\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11606-025-09807-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ethical principles of autonomy and beneficence guide clinical decision making. Little is known about how clinicians prioritize these principles and integrate them with virtue ethics when assessing the ethics of persuasion.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Survey medical students about their attitudes and experiences regarding the use of persuasion by physicians in shared decision making.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional, on-line survey.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Pre-clinical and clinical medical students at one US medical school.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Survey instrument contained 31 items including a three-part clinical vignette, attitudes toward persuasion and ethical principles, experiences observing or participating in persuasion, and demographic information. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were performed, including LASSO regression using a 30-point persuasion score derived from six items.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>237 students completed the survey (45% response rate). In general, 55.7% supported persuasion by physicians for the good of the patient's health. Nearly half supported persuasion for an at-risk cardiovascular patient who declines recommendations for walking or statin treatment; 64.1% supported persuasion for a patient with myocardial infarction who wants to leave the hospital against medical advice. While 70.0% believed persuasion is appropriate because it promotes beneficence and nonmaleficence, 16.9% believed persuasion is inappropriate because it disrespects patient autonomy. Most students (81.0%) had seen a good physician role model for persuasion, and 38.0% had willingly participated in persuasion. LASSO regression identified four items contributing positively to the persuasion score (belief that persuasion promotes beneficence/nonmaleficence, observation of a good role model, experience participating in persuasion, male gender) and two negatively (belief that persuasion disrespects patient autonomy, observation of inappropriate use of persuasion).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Medical students vary in attitudes toward persuasion of patients by physicians, and variations are associated with differences in ethical beliefs, clinical experiences, and gender. Education regarding the use of persuasion should address ethical justification, experience, and role-modeling-which can be encompassed by virtue ethics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15860,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of General Internal Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of General Internal Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-025-09807-w\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-025-09807-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:自主和慈善的伦理原则指导临床决策。在评估说服伦理时,临床医生如何优先考虑这些原则,并将它们与美德伦理结合起来,我们知之甚少。目的:调查医学生对医生在共同决策中使用劝说的态度和体会。设计:横断面在线调查。参与者:一所美国医学院的临床前和临床医学学生。主要测量方法:调查工具包含31个项目,包括临床小短文,对说服和伦理原则的态度,观察或参与说服的经验,人口统计信息。进行了双变量和多变量分析,包括使用从六个项目得出的30分说服分数的LASSO回归。主要结果:237名学生完成调查,回复率45%。总的来说,55.7%的人支持医生为了病人的健康而进行的劝说。近一半的人支持对拒绝散步或他汀类药物治疗的高危心血管患者进行劝说;64.1%的人支持对心肌梗死患者不遵医嘱想出院的劝说。而70.0%的人认为说服是合适的,因为它促进了慈善和非恶意,16.9%的人认为说服是不合适的,因为它不尊重病人的自主权。大多数学生(81.0%)见过好医生劝导的榜样,38.0%的学生愿意参与劝导。LASSO回归确定了四个对说服得分有积极贡献的项目(相信说服促进善行/非恶行,观察到一个好的榜样,参与说服的经验,男性)和两个负向贡献的项目(相信说服不尊重病人的自主权,观察到不适当地使用说服)。结论:医学生对医生说服患者的态度存在差异,这种差异与伦理信仰、临床经验和性别的差异有关。关于说服使用的教育应该涉及道德辩护、经验和角色塑造——这些可以被美德伦理所包含。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Medical Students' Attitudes and Experiences Regarding Persuasion of Patients by Physicians: Clarifying the Ethics of Shared Decision Making.

Background: Ethical principles of autonomy and beneficence guide clinical decision making. Little is known about how clinicians prioritize these principles and integrate them with virtue ethics when assessing the ethics of persuasion.

Objective: Survey medical students about their attitudes and experiences regarding the use of persuasion by physicians in shared decision making.

Design: Cross-sectional, on-line survey.

Participants: Pre-clinical and clinical medical students at one US medical school.

Main measures: Survey instrument contained 31 items including a three-part clinical vignette, attitudes toward persuasion and ethical principles, experiences observing or participating in persuasion, and demographic information. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were performed, including LASSO regression using a 30-point persuasion score derived from six items.

Key results: 237 students completed the survey (45% response rate). In general, 55.7% supported persuasion by physicians for the good of the patient's health. Nearly half supported persuasion for an at-risk cardiovascular patient who declines recommendations for walking or statin treatment; 64.1% supported persuasion for a patient with myocardial infarction who wants to leave the hospital against medical advice. While 70.0% believed persuasion is appropriate because it promotes beneficence and nonmaleficence, 16.9% believed persuasion is inappropriate because it disrespects patient autonomy. Most students (81.0%) had seen a good physician role model for persuasion, and 38.0% had willingly participated in persuasion. LASSO regression identified four items contributing positively to the persuasion score (belief that persuasion promotes beneficence/nonmaleficence, observation of a good role model, experience participating in persuasion, male gender) and two negatively (belief that persuasion disrespects patient autonomy, observation of inappropriate use of persuasion).

Conclusions: Medical students vary in attitudes toward persuasion of patients by physicians, and variations are associated with differences in ethical beliefs, clinical experiences, and gender. Education regarding the use of persuasion should address ethical justification, experience, and role-modeling-which can be encompassed by virtue ethics.

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
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Journal of General Internal Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
749
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of General Internal Medicine is the official journal of the Society of General Internal Medicine. It promotes improved patient care, research, and education in primary care, general internal medicine, and hospital medicine. Its articles focus on topics such as clinical medicine, epidemiology, prevention, health care delivery, curriculum development, and numerous other non-traditional themes, in addition to classic clinical research on problems in internal medicine.
×
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