共享决策。临床医生入门。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Glyn Elwyn, Pål Gulbrandsen, Hannah Leavitt, Eman Abukmail, Marla L Clayman, Adrian Edwards, Jeanette Finderup, Alana Fisher, Stuart W Grande, Pola Hahlweg, Tammy Hoffmann, Wen-Hsuan Hou, María José Hernández-Leal, Debra Leung, Weiwei Lu, Lars Mandelkow, Kristen E Pecanac, Arwen H Pieterse, Amy Price, Jannicke Rabben, Paula Riganti, Michael Sanatani, Fülöp Scheibler, Elise Schoefs, Owen A Taylor, Kathrene D Valentine, Richard Wexler
{"title":"共享决策。临床医生入门。","authors":"Glyn Elwyn, Pål Gulbrandsen, Hannah Leavitt, Eman Abukmail, Marla L Clayman, Adrian Edwards, Jeanette Finderup, Alana Fisher, Stuart W Grande, Pola Hahlweg, Tammy Hoffmann, Wen-Hsuan Hou, María José Hernández-Leal, Debra Leung, Weiwei Lu, Lars Mandelkow, Kristen E Pecanac, Arwen H Pieterse, Amy Price, Jannicke Rabben, Paula Riganti, Michael Sanatani, Fülöp Scheibler, Elise Schoefs, Owen A Taylor, Kathrene D Valentine, Richard Wexler","doi":"10.1007/s11606-025-09707-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Shared decision-making is a widely promoted approach, yet clinicians, typically supportive in principle, find it difficult to implement because of concerns and barriers they commonly encounter in practice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To generate a primer that describes shared decision-making from the perspective of clinicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collaborated with clinicians, patient representatives, and health service researchers. We invited members of the International Society of Shared Decision Making to co-produce a primer for clinicians using a series of jointly edited online documents. We shared drafts with other clinicians and patients. Finally, we integrated the contributions until we had arrived at a consensus.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Twenty-five people from 13 countries contributed; 9 had medical qualifications, 4 had nursing qualifications, and 12 others had a range of backgrounds. A total of 30 patients and clinicians provided further comments. The description differs from previous versions because it addresses the barriers that clinicians frequently mention. It describes how to overcome common challenges by emphasizing the importance of a clear invitation at initiation; it suggests how to manage patients' resistance to shouldering decisional responsibility; reinforces the need to allow time for deliberation, especially with other stakeholders; and reassures clinicians that consensus, albeit welcome, need not be the goal of shared decision-making.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>This primer portrays a reflective clinician who is aware of power asymmetry, patient vulnerability, risk communication, health literacy, agenda setting, and goal clarification. It envisages a clinician who is curious about personal perspectives and who can offer collaborative, iterative, and deliberative steps.</p>","PeriodicalId":15860,"journal":{"name":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shared Decision-Making. A Primer for Clinicians.\",\"authors\":\"Glyn Elwyn, Pål Gulbrandsen, Hannah Leavitt, Eman Abukmail, Marla L Clayman, Adrian Edwards, Jeanette Finderup, Alana Fisher, Stuart W Grande, Pola Hahlweg, Tammy Hoffmann, Wen-Hsuan Hou, María José Hernández-Leal, Debra Leung, Weiwei Lu, Lars Mandelkow, Kristen E Pecanac, Arwen H Pieterse, Amy Price, Jannicke Rabben, Paula Riganti, Michael Sanatani, Fülöp Scheibler, Elise Schoefs, Owen A Taylor, Kathrene D Valentine, Richard Wexler\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11606-025-09707-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Shared decision-making is a widely promoted approach, yet clinicians, typically supportive in principle, find it difficult to implement because of concerns and barriers they commonly encounter in practice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To generate a primer that describes shared decision-making from the perspective of clinicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collaborated with clinicians, patient representatives, and health service researchers. We invited members of the International Society of Shared Decision Making to co-produce a primer for clinicians using a series of jointly edited online documents. We shared drafts with other clinicians and patients. Finally, we integrated the contributions until we had arrived at a consensus.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Twenty-five people from 13 countries contributed; 9 had medical qualifications, 4 had nursing qualifications, and 12 others had a range of backgrounds. A total of 30 patients and clinicians provided further comments. The description differs from previous versions because it addresses the barriers that clinicians frequently mention. It describes how to overcome common challenges by emphasizing the importance of a clear invitation at initiation; it suggests how to manage patients' resistance to shouldering decisional responsibility; reinforces the need to allow time for deliberation, especially with other stakeholders; and reassures clinicians that consensus, albeit welcome, need not be the goal of shared decision-making.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>This primer portrays a reflective clinician who is aware of power asymmetry, patient vulnerability, risk communication, health literacy, agenda setting, and goal clarification. It envisages a clinician who is curious about personal perspectives and who can offer collaborative, iterative, and deliberative steps.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15860,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of General Internal Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-07\",\"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/s11606-025-09707-z\",\"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/s11606-025-09707-z","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

重要性:共同决策是一种被广泛推广的方法,然而临床医生通常原则上支持,但由于他们在实践中经常遇到的问题和障碍,他们发现很难实施。目的:从临床医生的角度生成一个描述共同决策的引物。方法:我们与临床医生、患者代表和卫生服务研究人员合作。我们邀请了国际共同决策学会的成员,利用一系列共同编辑的在线文件,共同为临床医生编写了一本入门手册。我们与其他临床医生和患者分享了草稿。最后,我们综合了各方的意见,直到达成一致意见。调查结果:来自13个国家的25人做出了贡献;9人有医疗资格,4人有护理资格,另外12人有不同的背景。共有30名患者和临床医生提供了进一步的意见。该描述与以前的版本不同,因为它解决了临床医生经常提到的障碍。它描述了如何通过强调在发起时明确邀请的重要性来克服共同的挑战;建议如何管理患者对承担决策责任的抗拒;强调需要留出时间进行审议,特别是与其他利益攸关方进行审议;并向临床医生保证,共识虽然受欢迎,但不一定是共同决策的目标。结论和相关性:这本初级读物描绘了一个意识到权力不对称、患者脆弱性、风险沟通、健康素养、议程设置和目标澄清的反思性临床医生。它设想了一个临床医生谁是好奇的个人观点,谁可以提供合作,迭代和审慎的步骤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Shared Decision-Making. A Primer for Clinicians.

Importance: Shared decision-making is a widely promoted approach, yet clinicians, typically supportive in principle, find it difficult to implement because of concerns and barriers they commonly encounter in practice.

Objective: To generate a primer that describes shared decision-making from the perspective of clinicians.

Methods: We collaborated with clinicians, patient representatives, and health service researchers. We invited members of the International Society of Shared Decision Making to co-produce a primer for clinicians using a series of jointly edited online documents. We shared drafts with other clinicians and patients. Finally, we integrated the contributions until we had arrived at a consensus.

Findings: Twenty-five people from 13 countries contributed; 9 had medical qualifications, 4 had nursing qualifications, and 12 others had a range of backgrounds. A total of 30 patients and clinicians provided further comments. The description differs from previous versions because it addresses the barriers that clinicians frequently mention. It describes how to overcome common challenges by emphasizing the importance of a clear invitation at initiation; it suggests how to manage patients' resistance to shouldering decisional responsibility; reinforces the need to allow time for deliberation, especially with other stakeholders; and reassures clinicians that consensus, albeit welcome, need not be the goal of shared decision-making.

Conclusions and relevance: This primer portrays a reflective clinician who is aware of power asymmetry, patient vulnerability, risk communication, health literacy, agenda setting, and goal clarification. It envisages a clinician who is curious about personal perspectives and who can offer collaborative, iterative, and deliberative steps.

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