“反导”方法改善手术知情同意和共同决策:一项概念验证研究。

IF 2.6 Q1 SURGERY Patient Safety in Surgery Pub Date : 2022-10-28 DOI:10.1186/s13037-022-00342-9
Kevin D Seely, Jordan A Higgs, Lindsey Butts, Jason M Roe, Colton B Merrill, Isain Zapata, Andrew Nigh
{"title":"“反导”方法改善手术知情同意和共同决策:一项概念验证研究。","authors":"Kevin D Seely,&nbsp;Jordan A Higgs,&nbsp;Lindsey Butts,&nbsp;Jason M Roe,&nbsp;Colton B Merrill,&nbsp;Isain Zapata,&nbsp;Andrew Nigh","doi":"10.1186/s13037-022-00342-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The teach-back method is a communication tool that can improve patient safety and shared decision-making. Its utility in patient care has been studied extensively in many areas of clinical medicine. However, the literature on teach-back in surgical patient education and informed consent is limited, and few studies have been conducted to test its impact on perioperative patient interactions. The objective of this study was to evaluate if the teach-back method can improve informed consent and surgeon trust. An assessment of the time required to be implemented was also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A standardized interaction role-playing a pre-operative informed consent discussion was designed. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was selected as the proposed procedure. Standardized patients were split into two groups: teach-back and a control group. The control group was delivered a script that discloses the risks and benefits of laparoscopic cholecystectomy followed by a concluding prompt for any questions. The teach-back group was presented the same script followed by the teach-back method. Interactions were timed and patients completed a quiz assessing their knowledge of the risks and benefits and a survey assessing subjective perceptions about the interaction. Statistical analysis through Generalized Linear Models (GLMs) was used to compare visit length, performance on the comprehension quiz, and subjective surgeon trust perceptions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>34 participants completed the scenario, the comprehension quiz, and the survey (n = 34). Analysis of the subjective evaluation of the physician and encounter was significant for increased physician trust (p = 0.0457). The intervention group performed higher on the knowledge check by an average of one point when compared to the control group (p = 0.0479). The visits with intervention took an average of 2.45 min longer than the control group visits (p = 0.0014). People who had the actual procedure in the past (evaluated as a confounder) were not significantly more likely to display the same effect as the teach-back method, suggesting that the knowledge and trust gained were not based on previous experiences with the procedure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When employed correctly by surgeons in the perioperative setting, the teach-back method enhances shared decision-making, comprehension, and surgeon trust. Incorporating the teach-back method into risk and benefit disclosures effectively informs and more fully engages patients in the informed consent process. Notably, the added benefits from using teach-back can be obtained without a burdensome increase in the length of visit.</p>","PeriodicalId":46782,"journal":{"name":"Patient Safety in Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9617437/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The \\\"teach-back\\\" method improves surgical informed consent and shared decision-making: a proof of concept study.\",\"authors\":\"Kevin D Seely,&nbsp;Jordan A Higgs,&nbsp;Lindsey Butts,&nbsp;Jason M Roe,&nbsp;Colton B Merrill,&nbsp;Isain Zapata,&nbsp;Andrew Nigh\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13037-022-00342-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The teach-back method is a communication tool that can improve patient safety and shared decision-making. Its utility in patient care has been studied extensively in many areas of clinical medicine. However, the literature on teach-back in surgical patient education and informed consent is limited, and few studies have been conducted to test its impact on perioperative patient interactions. The objective of this study was to evaluate if the teach-back method can improve informed consent and surgeon trust. An assessment of the time required to be implemented was also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A standardized interaction role-playing a pre-operative informed consent discussion was designed. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was selected as the proposed procedure. Standardized patients were split into two groups: teach-back and a control group. The control group was delivered a script that discloses the risks and benefits of laparoscopic cholecystectomy followed by a concluding prompt for any questions. The teach-back group was presented the same script followed by the teach-back method. Interactions were timed and patients completed a quiz assessing their knowledge of the risks and benefits and a survey assessing subjective perceptions about the interaction. Statistical analysis through Generalized Linear Models (GLMs) was used to compare visit length, performance on the comprehension quiz, and subjective surgeon trust perceptions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>34 participants completed the scenario, the comprehension quiz, and the survey (n = 34). Analysis of the subjective evaluation of the physician and encounter was significant for increased physician trust (p = 0.0457). The intervention group performed higher on the knowledge check by an average of one point when compared to the control group (p = 0.0479). The visits with intervention took an average of 2.45 min longer than the control group visits (p = 0.0014). People who had the actual procedure in the past (evaluated as a confounder) were not significantly more likely to display the same effect as the teach-back method, suggesting that the knowledge and trust gained were not based on previous experiences with the procedure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When employed correctly by surgeons in the perioperative setting, the teach-back method enhances shared decision-making, comprehension, and surgeon trust. Incorporating the teach-back method into risk and benefit disclosures effectively informs and more fully engages patients in the informed consent process. Notably, the added benefits from using teach-back can be obtained without a burdensome increase in the length of visit.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patient Safety in Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9617437/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patient Safety in Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13037-022-00342-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient Safety in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13037-022-00342-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

介绍:反导法是一种沟通工具,可以提高患者的安全性和共同决策。它在病人护理中的应用在临床医学的许多领域得到了广泛的研究。然而,关于反教在手术患者教育和知情同意方面的文献是有限的,并且很少有研究测试其对围手术期患者互动的影响。本研究的目的是评估背教方法是否可以提高知情同意和外科医生的信任。对执行所需时间的评估也进行了评价。方法:设计标准化互动角色扮演和术前知情同意讨论。选择腹腔镜胆囊切除术作为建议的手术方法。标准化患者分为两组:反教组和对照组。给对照组一份说明腹腔镜胆囊切除术的风险和益处的讲稿,并在结论性提示后回答任何问题。反教组呈现相同的脚本,然后采用反教方法。相互作用是定时的,患者完成了一项测试,评估他们对风险和益处的知识,以及一项调查,评估他们对相互作用的主观看法。通过广义线性模型(GLMs)进行统计分析,比较就诊时间、理解测验的表现和主观的外科医生信任感知。结果:34名参与者完成了场景、理解测验和调查(n = 34)。对医生的主观评价和遭遇的分析对医生信任的增加有显著意义(p = 0.0457)。干预组在知识检查上的得分比对照组平均高1分(p = 0.0479)。干预组就诊时间比对照组平均长2.45 min (p = 0.0014)。过去接受过实际治疗的人(被评估为混杂因素)并没有明显表现出与反导法相同的效果,这表明获得的知识和信任不是基于以前的治疗经验。结论:当外科医生在围手术期正确使用反馈方法时,可以提高共同决策、理解和外科医生的信任。将反馈方法纳入风险和利益披露有效地告知并更充分地使患者参与知情同意过程。值得注意的是,使用教学反馈的额外好处可以在不增加访问时间的情况下获得。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
The "teach-back" method improves surgical informed consent and shared decision-making: a proof of concept study.

Introduction: The teach-back method is a communication tool that can improve patient safety and shared decision-making. Its utility in patient care has been studied extensively in many areas of clinical medicine. However, the literature on teach-back in surgical patient education and informed consent is limited, and few studies have been conducted to test its impact on perioperative patient interactions. The objective of this study was to evaluate if the teach-back method can improve informed consent and surgeon trust. An assessment of the time required to be implemented was also evaluated.

Methods: A standardized interaction role-playing a pre-operative informed consent discussion was designed. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was selected as the proposed procedure. Standardized patients were split into two groups: teach-back and a control group. The control group was delivered a script that discloses the risks and benefits of laparoscopic cholecystectomy followed by a concluding prompt for any questions. The teach-back group was presented the same script followed by the teach-back method. Interactions were timed and patients completed a quiz assessing their knowledge of the risks and benefits and a survey assessing subjective perceptions about the interaction. Statistical analysis through Generalized Linear Models (GLMs) was used to compare visit length, performance on the comprehension quiz, and subjective surgeon trust perceptions.

Results: 34 participants completed the scenario, the comprehension quiz, and the survey (n = 34). Analysis of the subjective evaluation of the physician and encounter was significant for increased physician trust (p = 0.0457). The intervention group performed higher on the knowledge check by an average of one point when compared to the control group (p = 0.0479). The visits with intervention took an average of 2.45 min longer than the control group visits (p = 0.0014). People who had the actual procedure in the past (evaluated as a confounder) were not significantly more likely to display the same effect as the teach-back method, suggesting that the knowledge and trust gained were not based on previous experiences with the procedure.

Conclusion: When employed correctly by surgeons in the perioperative setting, the teach-back method enhances shared decision-making, comprehension, and surgeon trust. Incorporating the teach-back method into risk and benefit disclosures effectively informs and more fully engages patients in the informed consent process. Notably, the added benefits from using teach-back can be obtained without a burdensome increase in the length of visit.

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
6.80
自引率
8.10%
发文量
37
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊最新文献
Association between postoperative complications and hospital length of stay: a large-scale observational study of 4,495,582 patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) registry. Improving surgical technical skills for emergency fixation of unstable pelvic ring fractures: an experimental study using a pelvic ring fracture simulator. Efficacy of a novel oxygen scavenger mask in reducing local oxygen concentrations below the surgical fire risk threshold: an experimental proof-of-concept study. Unintentionally retained lap sponge mimicking an ovarian cyst two years after Caesarean section in a 37-year old patient: case report of a rare "never event" in Sudan. Opioid exit plans for tapering postoperative pain control in noncancer patients: a systematic review.
×
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