Empowerment: An Idea Whose Time Has Come in Diabetes Education

We have learned much in the past 10 years about how to help patients to acquire diabetes-related knowledge and skills and how to use strategies to help patients change behaviors. However, the application ofknowledge and techniques should be guided by a relevant, coherent, educational philosophy. Empowerment offers a practical conceptual framework for diabetes patient education. Empowering patients provides them with the knowledge, skills, and responsibility to effect change and has the potential to promote overall health and maximize the use of available resources. It is an idea whose time has come for diabetes education.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/68779/2/10.1177_014572179101700108.pd

Trends in publications regarding evidence-practice gaps: A literature review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Well-designed trials of strategies to improve adherence to clinical practice guidelines are needed to close persistent evidence-practice gaps. We studied how the number of these trials is changing with time, and to what extent physicians are participating in such trials.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This is a literature-based study of trends in evidence-practice gap publications over 10 years and participation of clinicians in intervention trials to narrow evidence-practice gaps. We chose nine evidence-based guidelines and identified relevant publications in the PubMed database from January 1998 to December 2007. We coded these publications by study type (intervention versus non-intervention studies). We further subdivided intervention studies into those for clinicians and those for patients. Data were analyzed to determine if observed trends were statistically significant.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We identified 1,151 publications that discussed evidence-practice gaps in nine topic areas. There were 169 intervention studies that were designed to improve adherence to well-established clinical guidelines, averaging 1.9 studies per year per topic area. Twenty-eight publications (34%; 95% CI: 24% - 45%) reported interventions intended for clinicians or health systems that met Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) criteria for adequate design. The median consent rate of physicians asked to participate in these well-designed studies was 60% (95% CI, 25% to 69%).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We evaluated research publications for nine evidence-practice gaps, and identified small numbers of well-designed intervention trials and low rates of physician participation in these trials.</p

Young pregnant women's views on the acceptability of screening for chlamydia as part of routine antenatal care

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In pregnancy, untreated chlamydia infection has been associated with adverse outcomes for both mother and infant. Like most women, pregnant women infected with chlamydia do not report genital symptoms, and are therefore unlikely to be aware of their infection. The aim of this study was to determine the acceptability of screening pregnant women aged 16-25 years for chlamydia as part of routine antenatal care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>As part of a larger prospective, cross-sectional study of pregnant women aged 16-25 years attending antenatal services across Melbourne, Australia, 100 women were invited to participate in a face-to-face, semi structured interview on the acceptability of screening for chlamydia during pregnancy. Women infected with chlamydia were oversampled (n = 31).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Women had low levels of awareness of chlamydia before the test, retained relatively little knowledge after the test and commonly had misconceptions around chlamydia transmission, testing and sequelae. Women indicated a high level of acceptance and support for chlamydia screening, expressing their willingness to undertake whatever care was necessary to ensure the health of their baby. There was a strong preference for urine testing over other methods of specimen collection. Women questioned why testing was not already conducted alongside other antenatal STI screening tests, particularly in view of the risks chlamydia poses to the baby. Women who tested positive for chlamydia had mixed reactions, however, most felt relief and gratitude at having had chlamydia detected and reported high levels of partner support.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Chlamydia screening as part of routine antenatal care was considered highly acceptable among young pregnant women who recognized the benefits of screening and strongly supported its implementation as part of routine antenatal care. The acceptability of screening is important to the uptake of chlamydia screening in future antenatal screening strategies.</p

Applying strategies from libertarian paternalism to decision making for prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite the recent publication of results from two randomized clinical trials, prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer remains a controversial issue. There is lack of agreement across studies that PSA screening significantly reduces prostate cancer mortality. In spite of these facts, the widespread use of PSA testing in the United States leads to overdetection and overtreatment of clinically indolent prostate cancer, and its associated harms of incontinence and impotence.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Given the inconclusive results from clinical trials and incongruent PSA screening guidelines, the decision to screen for prostate cancer with PSA testing is an uncertain one for patients and health care providers. Screening guidelines from some health organizations recommend an informed decision making (IDM) or shared decision making (SDM) approach for deciding on PSA screening. These approaches aim to empower patients to choose among the available options by making them active participants in the decision making process. By increasing involvement of patients in the clinical decision-making process, IDM/SDM places more of the responsibility for a complex decision on the patient. Research suggests, however, that patients are not well-informed of the harms and benefits associated with prostate cancer screening and are also subject to an assortment of biases, emotion, fears, and irrational thought that interferes with making an informed decision. In response, the IDM/SDM approaches can be augmented with strategies from the philosophy of libertarian paternalism (LP) to improve decision making. LP uses the insights of behavioural economics to help people better make better choices. Some of the main strategies of LP applicable to PSA decision making are a default decision rule, framing of decision aids, and timing of the decision. In this paper, we propose that applying strategies from libertarian paternalism can help with PSA screening decision-making.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>Our proposal to augment IDM and SDM approaches with libertarian paternalism strategies is intended to guide patients toward a better decision about testing while maintaining personal freedom of choice. While PSA screening remains controversial and evidence conflicting, a libertarian-paternalism influenced approach to decision making can help prevent the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer.</p