Intervenciones para la promoción de un enfoque centrado en el paciente por parte de los profesionales en las consultas clínicas
Información
- DOI:
- https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003267.pub2Copiar DOI
- Base de datos:
-
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Versión publicada:
-
- 12 diciembre 2012see what's new
- Tipo:
-
- Intervention
- Etapa:
-
- Review
- Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
-
Grupo Cochrane de Consumidores y comunicación
- Copyright:
-
- Copyright © 2013 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Cifras del artículo
Altmetric:
Citado por:
Autores
Contributions of authors
JC conducted the literature search. FCD, MHR, CG, SL, GS, LF, AO, RCS, JC, EBL, AAS applied the inclusion criteria, assessed the quality, extracted the data for the included studies and conducted the descriptive analysis. AS, SJ, and FCD conducted the meta‐analyses. FCD drafted and revised the manuscript for this update with input from the other review authors.
Sources of support
Internal sources
-
Department of Medicine, Michigan State University, USA.
Salary support for Gelareh Sadigh, MD
External sources
-
World Health Organization, Switzerland.
Supplied funding for a research assistant, and for statistical analysis performed at Michigan State University and Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services. Funding also included travel support for Dr. Francesca Dwamena.
Declarations of interest
Simon Lewin is an editor for the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group. He did not have any influence over the Review Group's editorial process or decision to publish this review.
Acknowledgements
Initial study screening volunteers: In addition to the authors of the study, the following participated in the initial phases of study screening and data abstraction: Professor Linda French, Chair of Family Medicine at the University of Toledo College of Medicine, Toledo, Ohio, USA; Elizabeth Bogdan‐Lovis and Karen Kelly‐Blake of the Michigan State University Center for Ethics, East Lansing, MI, Aileen Antonio‐Santos of Grand Rapids Medical Education Partners, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
Peer‐reviewers: The authors thank all peer reviewers for their helpful comments.
Statistical advice: Joanne McKenzie and Jason Wasiak.
The study authors who provided us with additional information regarding study designs and interventions.
Dell Horey, Sophie Hill and Megan Prictor at the editorial base for the Consumer and Communication Review Group.
Funders: Department of Medicine, Michigan State University, USA who provided salary support for Gelareh Sadigh, MD; and World Health Organization (WHO), Switzerland who supplied funding for a research assistant, and for statistical analysis performed at Michigan State University and Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services. WHO funding also included travel support for Dr. Francesca Dwamena.
We acknowledge the authors of the original Cochrane review (Lewin 2001): Simon Lewin, Zoe Skea, Vikki A. Entwistle, Merrick Zwarenstein and Judy Dick.
Version history
| Published | Title | Stage | Authors | Version |
| 2012 Dec 12 | Interventions for providers to promote a patient‐centred approach in clinical consultations | Review | Francesca Dwamena, Margaret Holmes‐Rovner, Carolyn M Gaulden, Sarah Jorgenson, Gelareh Sadigh, Alla Sikorskii, Simon Lewin, Robert C Smith, John Coffey, Adesuwa Olomu, Michael Beasley | |
| 2001 Oct 23 | Interventions for providers to promote a patient‐centred approach in clinical consultations | Review | Simon Lewin, Zoe Skea, Vikki A Entwistle, Merrick Zwarenstein, Judy Dick | |
Differences between protocol and review
This study excluded non‐randomized studies because of the increased availability of better quality studies. Given our decision to only include RCTs, we adapted earlier search strategies to look only for RCTs. We used accepted RCT filters developed by Consumers and Communication Group and/or Cochrane for the different databases as these filters were designed to pick up these types of studies.
In the original review, we assessed the intensity of patient‐centredness and teaching/training tactics for each intervention in the included studies using a three point scale (weak, medium, strong). In the update, the three point scale was found to be unreliable. A post‐hoc measure of intensity in number of hours was used, dichotomized as Brief Training (< 10 hours) and Extensive Training (≥ 10 hours).
In the update, the 'satisfaction' category was modified to exclude carers' satisfaction with care, as it was rarely measured, and added heterogeneity to the review's findings. The 'health behavior' category was modified to be more consistent with measures of behaviours found in studies. The previous (Lewin 2001) definition was: "Other healthcare behaviours, including types of care plans agreed; providers' provision of interventions; patients' adoption of lifestyle behaviours; and patients' use of interventions and services".
This update includes an assessment of risk of bias for each study using the Cochrane criteria for judging risk of bias.
