在临床实践中落实共同决策。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ALLERGY Allergy and asthma proceedings Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.2500/aap.2024.45.240048
Marcus S Shaker, Marylee Verdi
{"title":"在临床实践中落实共同决策。","authors":"Marcus S Shaker, Marylee Verdi","doi":"10.2500/aap.2024.45.240048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Shared decision-making (SDM) requires a clear-eyed view of evidence certainty, context, and equipoise in clinical care. This paradigm of care builds on the foundational ethical principle of patient autonomy, further leveraging beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice to provide bespoke care in the appropriate clinical setting. When evidence is carefully evaluated together with acceptability and feasibility, equity, cost-effectiveness, resources, and patient preferences, an individualized assessment of the trade-off between possible benefits and harms can optimize patient management. In the setting of a conditional recommendation, it is appropriate to engage in SDM with patient partners, to the extent each patient is willing and able to engage in the SDM process. Three conversations inform SDM and include team talk, option talk, and decision talk with discussion of the plan of care. During these conversations, clear communication strategies that are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, time sensitive, and provide assessment of absolute (not just relative) risk are important to provide necessary education to patient partners. Follow-up is key to ensure that decisions lead to effective treatment. Through this process, it is necessary to minimize cognitive overload and promote a minimally disruptive medicine approach. The acronym \"HOW\" promotes a holistic appraisal of evidence in context, open-minded teamwork with patients and families, and willingness to be a listening presence while serving as a partner and guide and appreciating the multidimensional and unique nature of each individual. SDM is and will continue to remain a cornerstone of appropriate medical care in settings of clinical equipoise.</p>","PeriodicalId":7646,"journal":{"name":"Allergy and asthma proceedings","volume":"45 6","pages":"398-403"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Operationalizing shared decision making in clinical practice.\",\"authors\":\"Marcus S Shaker, Marylee Verdi\",\"doi\":\"10.2500/aap.2024.45.240048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Shared decision-making (SDM) requires a clear-eyed view of evidence certainty, context, and equipoise in clinical care. This paradigm of care builds on the foundational ethical principle of patient autonomy, further leveraging beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice to provide bespoke care in the appropriate clinical setting. When evidence is carefully evaluated together with acceptability and feasibility, equity, cost-effectiveness, resources, and patient preferences, an individualized assessment of the trade-off between possible benefits and harms can optimize patient management. In the setting of a conditional recommendation, it is appropriate to engage in SDM with patient partners, to the extent each patient is willing and able to engage in the SDM process. Three conversations inform SDM and include team talk, option talk, and decision talk with discussion of the plan of care. During these conversations, clear communication strategies that are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, time sensitive, and provide assessment of absolute (not just relative) risk are important to provide necessary education to patient partners. Follow-up is key to ensure that decisions lead to effective treatment. Through this process, it is necessary to minimize cognitive overload and promote a minimally disruptive medicine approach. The acronym \\\"HOW\\\" promotes a holistic appraisal of evidence in context, open-minded teamwork with patients and families, and willingness to be a listening presence while serving as a partner and guide and appreciating the multidimensional and unique nature of each individual. SDM is and will continue to remain a cornerstone of appropriate medical care in settings of clinical equipoise.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Allergy and asthma proceedings\",\"volume\":\"45 6\",\"pages\":\"398-403\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Allergy and asthma proceedings\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2500/aap.2024.45.240048\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ALLERGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Allergy and asthma proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2500/aap.2024.45.240048","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

共同决策(SDM)要求在临床护理中对证据的确定性、背景和均衡性有清晰的认识。这种护理模式建立在患者自主这一基本伦理原则之上,进一步利用受益性、非恶意性和公正性,在适当的临床环境中提供量身定制的护理。在对证据以及可接受性和可行性、公平性、成本效益、资源和患者偏好进行仔细评估后,对可能的益处和危害之间的权衡进行个性化评估,可以优化患者管理。在有条件推荐的情况下,在每位患者愿意并能够参与 SDM 过程的前提下,与患者伙伴一起参与 SDM 是合适的。SDM 有三种谈话方式,包括团队谈话、选择谈话和决策谈话,并对护理计划进行讨论。在这些谈话中,明确的沟通策略非常重要,这些策略应具体、可衡量、可实现、现实、具有时间敏感性,并提供绝对(而不仅仅是相对)风险评估,以便为患者伙伴提供必要的教育。随访是确保决策能带来有效治疗的关键。在这一过程中,有必要最大限度地减少认知负担,并推广破坏性最小的医疗方法。缩写 "HOW "提倡根据具体情况对证据进行全面评估,与患者和家属开展开放式的团队合作,愿意倾听患者的心声,同时充当患者的合作伙伴和指导者,了解每个人的多面性和独特性。SDM 现在是并将继续是临床平衡环境下适当医疗护理的基石。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Operationalizing shared decision making in clinical practice.

Shared decision-making (SDM) requires a clear-eyed view of evidence certainty, context, and equipoise in clinical care. This paradigm of care builds on the foundational ethical principle of patient autonomy, further leveraging beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice to provide bespoke care in the appropriate clinical setting. When evidence is carefully evaluated together with acceptability and feasibility, equity, cost-effectiveness, resources, and patient preferences, an individualized assessment of the trade-off between possible benefits and harms can optimize patient management. In the setting of a conditional recommendation, it is appropriate to engage in SDM with patient partners, to the extent each patient is willing and able to engage in the SDM process. Three conversations inform SDM and include team talk, option talk, and decision talk with discussion of the plan of care. During these conversations, clear communication strategies that are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, time sensitive, and provide assessment of absolute (not just relative) risk are important to provide necessary education to patient partners. Follow-up is key to ensure that decisions lead to effective treatment. Through this process, it is necessary to minimize cognitive overload and promote a minimally disruptive medicine approach. The acronym "HOW" promotes a holistic appraisal of evidence in context, open-minded teamwork with patients and families, and willingness to be a listening presence while serving as a partner and guide and appreciating the multidimensional and unique nature of each individual. SDM is and will continue to remain a cornerstone of appropriate medical care in settings of clinical equipoise.

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
5.70
自引率
35.70%
发文量
106
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Allergy & Asthma Proceedings is a peer reviewed publication dedicated to distributing timely scientific research regarding advancements in the knowledge and practice of allergy, asthma and immunology. Its primary readership consists of allergists and pulmonologists. The goal of the Proceedings is to publish articles with a predominantly clinical focus which directly impact quality of care for patients with allergic disease and asthma. Featured topics include asthma, rhinitis, sinusitis, food allergies, allergic skin diseases, diagnostic techniques, allergens, and treatment modalities. Published material includes peer-reviewed original research, clinical trials and review articles.
期刊最新文献
Real-world surveillance of standardized quality (SQ) house dust mite sublingual immunotherapy tablets for 3 years in Japan. A case of a rash after tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis and meningococcal vaccination. Eating increases disease activity in pediatric patients with symptomatic dermographism. A systematic review and meta-analysis exploring the bidirectional association between asthma and gastroesophageal reflux disease in children. Abstracts presented at the Eastern Allergy Conference May 30-June 2, 2024, Palm Beach, Florida.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1