首页> 外文期刊>MDM Policy & Practice >Is Shared Decision Making for End-of-Life Decisions Associated With Better Outcomes as Compared to Other Forms of Decision Making? A Systematic Literature Review:
【24h】

Is Shared Decision Making for End-of-Life Decisions Associated With Better Outcomes as Compared to Other Forms of Decision Making? A Systematic Literature Review:

机译:与其他形式的决策相比,针对寿命终止决策的共享决策是否具有更好的结果?系统文献综述:

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Whether shared decision making (SDM) has been evaluated for end-of-life (EOL) decisions as compared to other forms of decision making has not been studied. Purpose: To summarize the evidence on SDM being associated with better outcomes for EOL decision making, as compared to other forms of decision making. Data Sources: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases were searched through April 2014. Study Selection: Studies were selected that evaluated SDM, compared to any other decision making style, for an EOL decision. Data Extraction: Components of SDM tested, comparators to SDM, EOL decision being assessed, and outcomes measured. Data Synthesis: Seven studies met the inclusion criteria (three experimental and four observational studies). Results were analyzed using narrative synthesis. All three experimental studies compared SDM interventions to usual care. The four observational studies compared SDM to doctor-controlled decision making, or reported the correlation between level of SDM and outcomes. Components of SDM specified in each study differed widely, but the component most frequently included was presenting information on the risks/benefits of treatment choices (five of seven studies). The outcome most frequently measured was communication, although with different measurement tools. Other outcomes included decisional conflict, trust, satisfaction, and “quality of dying.” Limitations: We could not analyze the strength of evidence for a given outcome due to heterogeneity in the outcomes reported and measurement tools. Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence supporting SDM being associated with improved outcomes for EOL decisions as opposed to other forms of decision making. Future studies should describe which components of SDM are being tested, outline the comparator decision making style, and use validated tools to measure outcomes.
机译:背景:与其他形式的决策相比,是否已针对寿命终止(EOL)决策评估了共享决策(SDM)。目的:总结与其他形式的决策相比,SDM与更好的EOL决策结果相关的证据。数据来源:PubMed,Web of Science,Cochrane对照试验中心注册资料库,EMBASE,PsycINFO和CINAHL数据库,截止日期为2014年4月。研究选择:与其他任何决策方式相比,选择评估SDM的研究进行EOL决定。数据提取:已测试SDM的组件,SDM的比较器,正在评估的EOL决策以及已测量的结果。数据综合:七项研究符合纳入标准(三项实验研究和四项观察性研究)。结果采用叙述性综合分析。所有三项实验研究均将SDM干预与常规护理进行了比较。四项观察性研究将SDM与医生控制的决策进行了比较,或报告了SDM水平与结果之间的相关性。每个研究中指定的SDM成分差异很大,但最常包含的成分是有关治疗选择的风险/益处的信息(七项研究中的五项)。尽管使用不同的衡量工具,但最经常衡量的结果是沟通。其他结果包括决策冲突,信任,满意度和“死亡质量”。局限性:由于报告的结果和测量工具的异质性,我们无法分析给定结果的证据强度。结论:没有足够的证据支持SDM与EOL决策的改进结果相关,而与其他形式的决策相反。未来的研究应描述正在测试SDM的哪些组件,概述比较器的决策风格,并使用经过验证的工具来衡量结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号