首页> 外文期刊>Obstetrics and Gynecology: Journal of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists >Patient Decision Aids to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Obstetrics and Gynecology A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
【24h】

Patient Decision Aids to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Obstetrics and Gynecology A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

机译:患者决策辅助工会促进妇产科的共同决策和妇科进行系统审查和荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of patient decision aids to facilitate shared decision making in obstetrics and gynecology. DATA SOURCES: We searched , MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility specialized register, CINAHL, and EMBASE from 1946 to July 2019. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We selected randomized controlled trials comparing patient decision aids with usual clinical practice or a control intervention. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Thirty-five randomized controlled trials, which reported data from 9,790 women, were included. Patient decision aids were evaluated within a wide range of clinical scenarios relevant to obstetrics and gynecology, including contraception, vaginal birth after cesarean delivery, and pelvic organ prolapse. Study characteristics and quality were recorded for each study. The meta-analysis was based on random-effects methods for pooled data. A standardized mean difference of 0.2 is considered small, 0.5 moderate, and 0.8 large. When compared with usual clinical practice, the use of patient decision aids reduced decisional conflict (standardized mean difference -0.23; 95% CI -0.36, to -0.11; 19 trials; 4,624 women) and improved patient knowledge (standardized mean difference 0.58; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.71; 17 trials; 4,375 women). There was no difference in patient anxiety (standardized mean difference -0.04; 95% CI -0.14 to 0.06; 12 trials; 2,714 women) or satisfaction (standardized mean difference 0.17; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.24; 6 trials; 2,718 women). CONCLUSION: Patient decision aids are effective in facilitating shared decision making and can be helpful in clinical practice to support patient centered care informed by the best evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Register of Systematic Reviews, , CRD42018089953.
机译:目的:评估患者决策辅助促进妇产科的共同决策的有效性。数据来源:我们搜索,Medline,Central,Cochrane妇科和生育专业注册,CINAHL和2019年7月EMBASE。学习选择方法:我们选择了随机对照试验,比较患者决策辅助用途临床实践或控制干预。列表,整合和结果:三十五项随机对照试验,其中包括来自9,790名妇女的数据。在与妇产科有关的广泛临床情景中评估患者决策助剂,包括避孕,剖宫产后阴道分娩,骨盆器官脱垂。每项研究记录了研究特征和质量。元分析基于用于汇总数据的随机效应方法。标准化平均差异为0.2被认为是小,0.5中等,0.8个大。与通常的临床实践相比,使用患者决策助剂减少判断冲突(标准化平均差异-0.23; 95%CI -0.36,至-0.11; 19次试验; 4,624名妇女)和改善患者知识(标准化平均差异0.58; 95 %CI 0.44至0.71; 17项试验; 4,375名妇女)。患者焦虑没有差异(标准化平均值-0.04; 95%CI -0.14至0.06; 12项试验; 2,714名女性)或满意(标准化平均差异0.17; 95%CI 0.09至0.24; 6次试验; 2,718名妇女)。结论:患者决策辅助有效促进共享决策,有助于临床实践,以支持患者以患者为中心的护理获得最佳证据。系统评价注册:Prospero国际系统性评论登记册,CRD42018089953。

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