La integración de las preferencias del paciente en la práctica del cuidado

  1. Ángel Alfredo Martínez Ques 1
  2. Juan Gómez Salgado 2
  3. José María Rumbo Prieto 3
  1. 1 PAC Castro Caldelas. Área Sanitaria de Ourense, Verín y Barco de Valdeorras, Sergas. (Ourense, España). Grupo de investigación en Servicios de Salud ‘I-Saúde’. Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Galicia Sur (IIS Galicia Sur) SERGAS-UVIGO (España).
  2. 2 Área de Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública, Departamento de Sociología, Trabajo Social y Salud Pública, Facultad de Ciencias del Trabajo. Universidad de Huelva. (Huelva, España). Universidad Espíritu Santo, Guayaquil (Ecuador).
  3. 3 Unidad de Docencia e Investigación, Área Sanitaria de Ferrol, Sergas (Ferrol, España). Escuela Universitaria de Enfermería de A Coruña, Universidad de A Coruña (España).
Show affiliations +
Journal:
Ética de los cuidados: Humanización en salud

ISSN: 1988-7973

Year of publication: 2021

Issue: 14

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

More publications in: Ética de los cuidados: Humanización en salud

Abstract

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is considered one of the fundamental and primordial pillar that should guide health care, based on the results of research studies carried out with a rigorous and explicit methodology that minimizes biases. The preferences are also a source of evidence, but the integration process with other sources of evidence has been unsatisfactory The incorporation of patient preferences within the MBE allows to protect the rights of patients and improving health outcomes, under the umbrella of the shared decision model. Therefore, the way of providing healthcare today requires combining an evidence-based practice with a clinical model with patient participation and a deliberative style of shared decision-making.

Bibliographic References

  • Sackett DL, Straus S, Richardson SR, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evidence-Based Medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. London: Churchill Livingstone; 2000.
  • Haynes RB. What kind of evidence is it that Evidence-Based Medicine advocates want health care providers and consumers to pay attention to? BMC Health Serv Res. 2002;2:3.
  • Montori VM, Guyatt GH. Progress in evidence-based medicine. JAMA. 2008;300(15):1814-6.
  • Gálvez-Toro A. Enfermería basada en la evidencia: cómo incorporar la investigación a la práctica de los cuidados. Granada: Fundación Index; 2001.
  • Rycroft-Malone J, Seers K, Titchen A, Harvey G, Kitson A, McCormack B. What counts as evidence in evidence-based practice? J Adv Nurs. 2004;47(1): 81–90.
  • Pérez-Fuillerat N, Solano-Ruiz MC, Amezcua M. Conocimiento tácito: características en la práctica enfermera. Gac Sanit. 2019, 33(2): 191-6.
  • Sacristán JA. Medicina basada en la evidencia y medicina centrada en el paciente: algunas reflexiones sobre su integración. Rev Clin Esp. 2013;213(9):460-4.
  • Juvé ME. El cuidado enfermero: cuatro imágenes de la ética del cuidado. En: Gilligan C, (editor). La ética del cuidado. Barcelona: Cuadernos de la Fundación Grifols i Lucas, (núm. 30); 2013.
  • Cataldi-Amatriain RM. Alcances del principio de autonomía en medicina. En: Engelhardt D. Mainetti, JA, Cataldi R, Meyer L, (Editores). Bioética y Humanidades Médicas. Buenos Aires (Argentina): Biblos; 2004.
  • Lomas J, Culyer T, McCutcheon C, McAuley L, Law S. Conceptualizing and combining evidence for health system guidance: final report. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation; 2005.
  • Utens CM, van der Weijden T, Joore MA, Dirksen CD. The use of research evidence on patient preferences in pharmaceutical coverage decisions and clinical practice guideline development: exploratory study into current state of play and potential barriers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:540.
  • Dirksen, CD. The use of research evidence on patient preferences in health care decision-making: issues, controversies and moving forward. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2014;14(6):785-94.
  • Chewning B, Bylund C, Shah B, Arora NK, Gueguen JA, Makoul G. Patient preferences for shared decisions: A systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;86(1):9-18.
  • Street RL, Elwyn G, Epstein RM. Patient preferences and healthcare outcomes: An ecological perspective. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2012;12(2):167-80.
  • Van der Weijden T, Légaré F, Boivin A, Burgers JS, van Veenendaal H, Stiggelbout AM, et al. How to integrate individual patient values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines? A research protocol. Implement Sci. 2010;2(5):10.
  • Náfrádi L, Nakamoto K, Schulz PJ. Is patient empowerment the key to promote adherence? A systematic review of the relationship between self-efficacy, health locus of control and medication adherence. PLoS One. 2017;12(10):e0186458.
  • Truglio-Londrigan M, Slyer JT. Shared Decision-Making for Nursing Practice: An Integrative Review. Open Nurs J. 2018;12:1-14.
  • Bastemeijer CM, Voogt L, van Ewijk JP, Hazelzet JA. What do patient values and preferences mean? A taxonomy based on a systematic review of qualitative papers. Patient Educ Coun. 2017;100(5):871-81.
  • European Patients Forum. Carta sobre el empoderamiento de los pacientes. [documento en internet]. 2015. [Consultado el 21/12/2021]. Disponible en: https://www.eu-patient.eu/globalassets/campaign-patient-empowerment/charter/charter_es-final.pdf
  • Sinclair S, Beamer K, Hack TF, McClement S, Raffin Bouchal S, Chochinov HM, et al. Sympathy, empathy, and compassion: A grounded theory study of palliative care patients’ understandings, experiences, and preferences. Palliat Med. 2017; 31(5):437-47.
  • Sinclair S, Norris JM, McConnell SJ, Chochinov HM, Hack TF, Hagen NA, et al. Compassion: a scoping review of the healthcare literature. BMC Palliat Care. 2016;15:6.
  • Ruland CM. Improving patient outcomes by including patient preferences in nursing care. Proc AMIA Symp. 1998:448-52.
  • Mangin D, Stephen G, Bismah V, Risdon C. Making patient values visible in healthcare: a systematic review of tools to assess patient treatment priorities and preferences in the context of multimorbidity. BMJ Open. 2016;6(6):e010903.
  • Politi MC, Street RL. The importance of communication in collaborative decision making: facilitating shared mind and the management of uncertainty. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011;17(4):579–84.
  • Scholl I, Koelewijn-van Loon M, Sepucha K, Elwyn G, Légaré F, Härter M, et al. Measurement of shared decision making - a review of instruments. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2011; 105(4):313-24.
  • Russo S, Jongerius C, Faccio F, Pizzoli SFM, Pinto CA, Veldwijk J, Janssens R, Simons G, Falahee M, de Bekker-Grob E, Huys I, Postmus D, Kihlbom U, Pravettoni G. Understanding patients' preferences: a systematic review of psychological instru-ments used in patients' preference and decision studies. Value Health. 2019;22(4):491-501.
  • Eldh AC. Facilitating patient participation by embracing patients' preferences-A discussion. J Eval Clin Pract. 2019;25(6):1070-3.
  • National Research Council. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011.
  • Boivin A, Légaré F, Gagnon MP. Canadian rural family physicians' perceptions of clinical practice guidelines and shared decision-making. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2008; 13(2):79-84.
  • Chong CA, Chen I, Naglie G, Krahn MD. How well do guidelines incorporate evidence on patient preferences? J Gen Intern Med. 2009;24(8):977–82.
  • Murphy JF. Paternalism or partnership: clinical practice guidelines and patient preference. Ir Med J. 2008;101(8):232.
  • Boivin A, Green J, Van der Meulen J, Légaré F, Nolte E. Why consider patients’ preferences? A discourse analysis of clinical practice guideline developers. Med Care. 2009;47(8):908-15.
  • Umscheid CA. Should guidelines incorporate evidence on patient preferences? J Gen Intern Med. 2009;24(8):988–90.
  • Kim C, Armstrong MJ, Berta WB, Gagliardi AR. How to identify, incorporate and report patient preferences in clinical guidelines: A scoping review. Health Expect. 2020;23(5):1028-36.
  • Benz HL, Saha A, Tarver ME. Integrating the voice of the patient into the medical device regulatory process using patient preference information. Value Health. 2020;23(3):294-7.
  • Howard Wilsher S, Brainard J, Loke Y, Salter C. Patient and public involvement in health literacy interventions: a mapping review. Res Involv Engagem. 2017;3:31.
Data source: Dialnet