优化知情同意讨论:制定输血同意的叙述。

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 HEMATOLOGY Transfusion Medicine Reviews Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.tmrv.2023.150757
Michelle P. Zeller , Marissa Laureano , Aditi Khandelwal , Shannon J. Lane , Richard Haspel , Mark Fung , BEST Collaborative
{"title":"优化知情同意讨论:制定输血同意的叙述。","authors":"Michelle P. Zeller ,&nbsp;Marissa Laureano ,&nbsp;Aditi Khandelwal ,&nbsp;Shannon J. Lane ,&nbsp;Richard Haspel ,&nbsp;Mark Fung ,&nbsp;BEST Collaborative","doi":"10.1016/j.tmrv.2023.150757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Ensuring patient informed consent is a key tenet of modern medicine. Although transfusion of blood products is among the most common medical procedures performed in hospitalized patients, there is evidence that informed consent for transfusion is at times incomplete, poorly understood, hurried, and/or inaccurate. This study aimed to develop a narrative that can be used as a framework for practicing physicians and for educational purposes to optimize the process for obtaining informed consent for blood transfusion. The narrative was developed using a modified Delphi approach with 5 Rounds that included feedback from transfusion medicine (TM) experts, transfusion-provider physicians, and lay people. The surveys collected qualitative and quantitative data analyzed using thematic content analysis and descriptive statistics, respectively. Results from Rounds 1 and 2 generated a draft narrative and Rounds 3 to 5 informed further modifications. Round 1 included draft narrative scripts from 28 TM experts; thematic coding generated 97 topics. In round 2, 22/28 of the initial experts rated items identified from Round 1. Those with a content validity index (CVI) ≥ 0.8 were used by the authors to develop a narrative. In Round 3, 20/24 participants from Round 2 reviewed the narrative with 100% agreeing on the items included and 90% agreeing the flow was logical. In Round 4, 23 transfusion prescribers (non-TM physicians) reviewed the narrative for flow, manner, length, and usability; there was 83% agreement with the nonexclusion of important topics; 91% felt it would be effective for teaching trainees. Round 5 included 24 nonmedical laypeople of different demographics. Most participants (92%) thought that the script was appropriate in length and there were opportunities to ask questions. Participants could also identify the adverse transfusion reactions and understand that they could refuse the transfusion. A narrative for obtaining informed consent for blood transfusion was created through multiple rigorous iterations of review and feedback with both transfusion providers and the lay public. The narrative, developed for a specific clinical scenario, was well-received by medical and nonmedical participants and can be used, and modified, to help ensure patients understand the risks and benefits of blood transfusion.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56081,"journal":{"name":"Transfusion Medicine Reviews","volume":"37 3","pages":"Article 150757"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimizing Informed Consent Discussions: Developing a Narrative for Transfusion Consent\",\"authors\":\"Michelle P. Zeller ,&nbsp;Marissa Laureano ,&nbsp;Aditi Khandelwal ,&nbsp;Shannon J. Lane ,&nbsp;Richard Haspel ,&nbsp;Mark Fung ,&nbsp;BEST Collaborative\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tmrv.2023.150757\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Ensuring patient informed consent is a key tenet of modern medicine. Although transfusion of blood products is among the most common medical procedures performed in hospitalized patients, there is evidence that informed consent for transfusion is at times incomplete, poorly understood, hurried, and/or inaccurate. This study aimed to develop a narrative that can be used as a framework for practicing physicians and for educational purposes to optimize the process for obtaining informed consent for blood transfusion. The narrative was developed using a modified Delphi approach with 5 Rounds that included feedback from transfusion medicine (TM) experts, transfusion-provider physicians, and lay people. The surveys collected qualitative and quantitative data analyzed using thematic content analysis and descriptive statistics, respectively. Results from Rounds 1 and 2 generated a draft narrative and Rounds 3 to 5 informed further modifications. Round 1 included draft narrative scripts from 28 TM experts; thematic coding generated 97 topics. In round 2, 22/28 of the initial experts rated items identified from Round 1. Those with a content validity index (CVI) ≥ 0.8 were used by the authors to develop a narrative. In Round 3, 20/24 participants from Round 2 reviewed the narrative with 100% agreeing on the items included and 90% agreeing the flow was logical. In Round 4, 23 transfusion prescribers (non-TM physicians) reviewed the narrative for flow, manner, length, and usability; there was 83% agreement with the nonexclusion of important topics; 91% felt it would be effective for teaching trainees. Round 5 included 24 nonmedical laypeople of different demographics. Most participants (92%) thought that the script was appropriate in length and there were opportunities to ask questions. Participants could also identify the adverse transfusion reactions and understand that they could refuse the transfusion. A narrative for obtaining informed consent for blood transfusion was created through multiple rigorous iterations of review and feedback with both transfusion providers and the lay public. The narrative, developed for a specific clinical scenario, was well-received by medical and nonmedical participants and can be used, and modified, to help ensure patients understand the risks and benefits of blood transfusion.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56081,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transfusion Medicine Reviews\",\"volume\":\"37 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 150757\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transfusion Medicine Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887796323000470\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfusion Medicine Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887796323000470","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

确保患者知情同意是现代医学的一个重要原则。尽管血液制品的输血是住院患者最常见的医疗程序之一,但有证据表明,知情同意输血有时是不完整、不了解、仓促和/或不准确的。本研究旨在开发一种叙事,可作为执业医生的框架,并用于教育目的,以优化获得输血知情同意的过程。该叙述是使用改进的德尔菲方法开发的,共有5轮,其中包括输血医学(TM)专家、输血提供者医生和非专业人员的反馈。调查收集了分别使用主题内容分析和描述性统计分析的定性和定量数据。第1轮和第2轮的结果形成了叙述草稿,第3轮至第5轮提出了进一步的修改意见。第一轮包括28位TM专家的叙述性脚本草案;主题编码产生了97个主题。在第二轮中,22/28名最初的专家对第一轮确定的项目进行了评级。那些内容有效性指数(CVI)≥0.8的人被作者用来发展叙事。在第三轮中,来自第二轮的20/24名参与者审查了叙述,100%的人同意所包含的项目,90%的人同意流程是合乎逻辑的。在第4轮中,23名输血处方医生(非TM医生)审查了流程、方式、长度和可用性的叙述;83%的人同意不排除重要话题;91%的人认为这对培训学员来说是有效的。第五轮调查包括24名不同人口结构的非医学专业人士。大多数参与者(92%)认为剧本长度合适,有机会提问。参与者还可以识别输血不良反应,并了解他们可以拒绝输血。通过多次严格的审查和与输血提供者和非专业公众的反馈,创建了获得输血知情同意书的叙述。该叙述是为特定的临床场景开发的,受到医学和非医学参与者的好评,可以使用和修改,以帮助确保患者了解输血的风险和益处。
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
Optimizing Informed Consent Discussions: Developing a Narrative for Transfusion Consent

Ensuring patient informed consent is a key tenet of modern medicine. Although transfusion of blood products is among the most common medical procedures performed in hospitalized patients, there is evidence that informed consent for transfusion is at times incomplete, poorly understood, hurried, and/or inaccurate. This study aimed to develop a narrative that can be used as a framework for practicing physicians and for educational purposes to optimize the process for obtaining informed consent for blood transfusion. The narrative was developed using a modified Delphi approach with 5 Rounds that included feedback from transfusion medicine (TM) experts, transfusion-provider physicians, and lay people. The surveys collected qualitative and quantitative data analyzed using thematic content analysis and descriptive statistics, respectively. Results from Rounds 1 and 2 generated a draft narrative and Rounds 3 to 5 informed further modifications. Round 1 included draft narrative scripts from 28 TM experts; thematic coding generated 97 topics. In round 2, 22/28 of the initial experts rated items identified from Round 1. Those with a content validity index (CVI) ≥ 0.8 were used by the authors to develop a narrative. In Round 3, 20/24 participants from Round 2 reviewed the narrative with 100% agreeing on the items included and 90% agreeing the flow was logical. In Round 4, 23 transfusion prescribers (non-TM physicians) reviewed the narrative for flow, manner, length, and usability; there was 83% agreement with the nonexclusion of important topics; 91% felt it would be effective for teaching trainees. Round 5 included 24 nonmedical laypeople of different demographics. Most participants (92%) thought that the script was appropriate in length and there were opportunities to ask questions. Participants could also identify the adverse transfusion reactions and understand that they could refuse the transfusion. A narrative for obtaining informed consent for blood transfusion was created through multiple rigorous iterations of review and feedback with both transfusion providers and the lay public. The narrative, developed for a specific clinical scenario, was well-received by medical and nonmedical participants and can be used, and modified, to help ensure patients understand the risks and benefits of blood transfusion.

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
Transfusion Medicine Reviews
Transfusion Medicine Reviews 医学-血液学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
21 days
期刊介绍: Transfusion Medicine Reviews provides an international forum in English for the publication of scholarly work devoted to the various sub-disciplines that comprise Transfusion Medicine including hemostasis and thrombosis and cellular therapies. The scope of the journal encompasses basic science, practical aspects, laboratory developments, clinical indications, and adverse effects.
期刊最新文献
Single vs Double-Unit Transfusion in Patients With Hematological Disorders Undergoing Chemotherapy or Stem Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis Whole Blood Donor Iron Management Across Europe: Experiences and Challenges in Four Blood Establishments Single-Unit Transfusion Policy in Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: Less is Not Worse Ultra-Massive Transfusion: Predictors of Occurrence and In-Hospital mortality From the Australian and New Zealand Massive Transfusion Registry (ANZ-MTR) Beta-Amyloid Related Neurodegenerative and Neurovascular Diseases: Potential Implications for Transfusion 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
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