支持美国预防服务工作组建议中共享决策原则的沟通。

IF 1.7
MDM policy & practice Pub Date : 2021-12-19 eCollection Date: 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1177/23814683211067522
Michelle Eder, Ilya Ivlev, Jennifer S Lin
{"title":"支持美国预防服务工作组建议中共享决策原则的沟通。","authors":"Michelle Eder,&nbsp;Ilya Ivlev,&nbsp;Jennifer S Lin","doi":"10.1177/23814683211067522","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aims.</b> This methods project was conducted to support the US Preventive Services Task Force's (USPSTF) consideration of how information pertinent to shared decision making (SDM) can be best communicated in its recommendations. <b>Methods.</b> The project included a literature scan to identify SDM frameworks, audit of six USPSTF recommendations to judge the completeness of SDM communication, input from eight SDM experts on the most helpful SDM guidance to provide in USPSTF recommendations, and review of USPSTF recommendations and evidence reports to establish criteria for identifying topics that would most benefit from additional communication resources. <b>Results.</b> We identified eight SDM frameworks and selected one to guide the audit of USPSTF recommendations. All six recommendations include SDM elements related to the patient's role in decision making, preventive service being considered, pros and cons of options, uncertainties about benefits and harms, and importance of patient preferences. Two SDM elements are not routinely communicated in the recommendations-identification of <i>not</i> screening or initiating preventive medication as an alternative and the importance of patient understanding of options. Experts offered suggestions for essential SDM elements to address, such as assessing decisional conflict to measure patient uncertainty in choosing an option and highlighting uncertainty in estimates of benefit and harm, credibility of the evidence base, precision of estimates, and applicability to the individual patient. We developed six criteria for selection of USPSTF recommendations to supplement with a communication resource. <b>Conclusions.</b> The findings of this project can assist the USPSTF and other clinical guideline developers in incorporating SDM information in recommendations and determining which topics would most benefit from additional communication resources to support clinicians in engaging patients in SDM.</p>","PeriodicalId":520707,"journal":{"name":"MDM policy & practice","volume":" ","pages":"23814683211067522"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ab/cd/10.1177_23814683211067522.PMC8725016.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Supporting Communication of Shared Decision-Making Principles in US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations.\",\"authors\":\"Michelle Eder,&nbsp;Ilya Ivlev,&nbsp;Jennifer S Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23814683211067522\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Aims.</b> This methods project was conducted to support the US Preventive Services Task Force's (USPSTF) consideration of how information pertinent to shared decision making (SDM) can be best communicated in its recommendations. <b>Methods.</b> The project included a literature scan to identify SDM frameworks, audit of six USPSTF recommendations to judge the completeness of SDM communication, input from eight SDM experts on the most helpful SDM guidance to provide in USPSTF recommendations, and review of USPSTF recommendations and evidence reports to establish criteria for identifying topics that would most benefit from additional communication resources. <b>Results.</b> We identified eight SDM frameworks and selected one to guide the audit of USPSTF recommendations. All six recommendations include SDM elements related to the patient's role in decision making, preventive service being considered, pros and cons of options, uncertainties about benefits and harms, and importance of patient preferences. Two SDM elements are not routinely communicated in the recommendations-identification of <i>not</i> screening or initiating preventive medication as an alternative and the importance of patient understanding of options. Experts offered suggestions for essential SDM elements to address, such as assessing decisional conflict to measure patient uncertainty in choosing an option and highlighting uncertainty in estimates of benefit and harm, credibility of the evidence base, precision of estimates, and applicability to the individual patient. We developed six criteria for selection of USPSTF recommendations to supplement with a communication resource. <b>Conclusions.</b> The findings of this project can assist the USPSTF and other clinical guideline developers in incorporating SDM information in recommendations and determining which topics would most benefit from additional communication resources to support clinicians in engaging patients in SDM.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520707,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MDM policy & practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"23814683211067522\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ab/cd/10.1177_23814683211067522.PMC8725016.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MDM policy & practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683211067522\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MDM policy & practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683211067522","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

目标该方法项目的实施是为了支持美国预防服务工作组(USPSTF)考虑如何在其建议中最好地传达与共享决策(SDM)相关的信息。方法。该项目包括文献扫描以确定SDM框架,审核USPSTF的6项建议以判断SDM沟通的完整性,8位SDM专家就USPSTF建议中最有用的SDM指导提供意见,并审查USPSTF建议和证据报告,以建立识别最能从额外的沟通资源中受益的主题的标准。结果。我们确定了8个SDM框架,并选择了一个来指导USPSTF建议的审计。所有六项建议都包括SDM要素,涉及患者在决策中的作用、正在考虑的预防服务、选择的利弊、收益和危害的不确定性以及患者偏好的重要性。建议中没有常规传达SDM的两个要素:确定不筛查或启动预防性药物作为替代方案,以及患者理解选择的重要性。专家们对SDM需要解决的基本要素提出了建议,例如评估决策冲突以衡量患者在选择方案时的不确定性,并强调益处和危害估计的不确定性、证据基础的可信度、估计的准确性以及对个体患者的适用性。我们制定了六个标准来选择USPSTF建议,以补充通信资源。结论。该项目的研究结果可以帮助USPSTF和其他临床指南开发者将SDM信息纳入建议,并确定哪些主题最受益于额外的交流资源,以支持临床医生参与SDM的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Supporting Communication of Shared Decision-Making Principles in US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations.

Supporting Communication of Shared Decision-Making Principles in US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations.

Supporting Communication of Shared Decision-Making Principles in US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations.

Supporting Communication of Shared Decision-Making Principles in US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations.

Aims. This methods project was conducted to support the US Preventive Services Task Force's (USPSTF) consideration of how information pertinent to shared decision making (SDM) can be best communicated in its recommendations. Methods. The project included a literature scan to identify SDM frameworks, audit of six USPSTF recommendations to judge the completeness of SDM communication, input from eight SDM experts on the most helpful SDM guidance to provide in USPSTF recommendations, and review of USPSTF recommendations and evidence reports to establish criteria for identifying topics that would most benefit from additional communication resources. Results. We identified eight SDM frameworks and selected one to guide the audit of USPSTF recommendations. All six recommendations include SDM elements related to the patient's role in decision making, preventive service being considered, pros and cons of options, uncertainties about benefits and harms, and importance of patient preferences. Two SDM elements are not routinely communicated in the recommendations-identification of not screening or initiating preventive medication as an alternative and the importance of patient understanding of options. Experts offered suggestions for essential SDM elements to address, such as assessing decisional conflict to measure patient uncertainty in choosing an option and highlighting uncertainty in estimates of benefit and harm, credibility of the evidence base, precision of estimates, and applicability to the individual patient. We developed six criteria for selection of USPSTF recommendations to supplement with a communication resource. Conclusions. The findings of this project can assist the USPSTF and other clinical guideline developers in incorporating SDM information in recommendations and determining which topics would most benefit from additional communication resources to support clinicians in engaging patients 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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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