磁盘格式化
慢性阻塞性肺病
可读性
医学
随机对照试验
动作(物理)
互联网
医学物理学
临床试验
英语
点(几何)
注意事项
检查表
临床实习
梅德林
肺病
医学教育
初级保健
行动号召
计算机科学
重症监护医学
样品(材料)
临床终点
病人教育
短信
药物开发
健康素养
替代医学
物理疗法
作者
Ilziba Yusup,Rosalind Tang,Andrew Kouri,Don D. Sin,Darcy Marciniuk,Samir Gupta
摘要
Purpose: COPD action plans (APs) are integral to self-management and recommended across clinical practice guidelines, but primary care provider and patient usage remain low. Given that uptake is influenced by content, format, and development methods, we sought to collect a broad sample of existing COPD APs and to analyze these characteristics. Materials and Methods: We collected English language COPD APs from: 1) an internet search; 2) international COPD guidelines; 3) pulmonary/COPD organizations and experts; and 4) published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating COPD APs. For each AP, we described background information, development methods and any available evaluation data. We used guideline-based and inductively-derived criteria for AP content analysis. For format analysis, we applied recognized evidence-based formatting standards for printed educational material. We also calculated the Flesch-Kincaid readability scores. Results: We identified 63 unique COPD APs from seven countries. Information on the development methods was available in only seven (11%) APs, and only one included patients in development. 4/58 (7%) APs identified from sources other than RCTs had been formally evaluated (all as part of larger complex interventions). In AP content, we found inconsistency in definitions for the action point requiring treatment, in treatment instructions (eg medication options, doses, and duration), and in lifestyle/behavior change cues. Formatting across APs was also variable, and APs met a mean of only 5.4 ± 1.2 out of 8 core formatting principles for printed education material design. The average Flesch-Kincaid grade level was 6.5 ± 1.6. Conclusion: COPD APs are recommended across guidelines but are seldom implemented. Our novel analysis of internationally available COPD APs reveals that there are several intrinsic factors related to their development, evaluation, content, and format that may be contributing to this care gap. A uniform user preference-based COPD AP with expert consensus on content, and with usability/format optimization should be developed and evaluated.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI