Journal of orthodontics · 2021
The effectiveness of interventions to increase patient involvement in decision-making in orthodontics: A systematic review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shelswell Jonathan, Patel Veena Abigale, Barber Sophy
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of interventions that aim to increase patient involvement in treatment decisions in orthodontic, orthognathic and cleft treatment, based on patient-reported outcomes and patient knowledge.
DESIGN: Systematic review.
DATA SOURCES: OVID databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and EBM reviews), CENTRAL, WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and reference lists of included studies.
DATA SELECTION: Studies were selected by two reviewers independently and in duplicate based on pre-defined eligibility criteria: Population: People considering or undergoing orthodontic, orthognathic or cleft treatment. Intervention: Any intervention that aims to increase patient involvement in decision-making. Outcomes: Patient-reported outcomes and patient knowledge. Studies: All experimental studies published in English from January 2000 to October 2019 were eligible.
DATA EXTRACTION: Standardised data extraction of study information and assessment of risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for RCTs and ROBINS-I for non-randomised studies of interventions.
DATA SYNTHESIS: 13 randomised controlled trials were included. Due to heterogeneity in the studies, a narrative synthesis was undertaken. The majority (n=11) of studies involved orthodontic patients, with one study of cleft patients and one study of orthognathic and orthodontic patients. Six included studies reported significant differences between intervention and control groups with improved patient knowledge or better patient-reported outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: A variety of different interventions and outcome measures were used making data synthesis challenging. There is some evidence that interventions to increase patient involvement in decision-making can improve patient-reported outcomes and patient knowledge.
DESIGN: Systematic review.
DATA SOURCES: OVID databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and EBM reviews), CENTRAL, WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and reference lists of included studies.
DATA SELECTION: Studies were selected by two reviewers independently and in duplicate based on pre-defined eligibility criteria: Population: People considering or undergoing orthodontic, orthognathic or cleft treatment. Intervention: Any intervention that aims to increase patient involvement in decision-making. Outcomes: Patient-reported outcomes and patient knowledge. Studies: All experimental studies published in English from January 2000 to October 2019 were eligible.
DATA EXTRACTION: Standardised data extraction of study information and assessment of risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for RCTs and ROBINS-I for non-randomised studies of interventions.
DATA SYNTHESIS: 13 randomised controlled trials were included. Due to heterogeneity in the studies, a narrative synthesis was undertaken. The majority (n=11) of studies involved orthodontic patients, with one study of cleft patients and one study of orthognathic and orthodontic patients. Six included studies reported significant differences between intervention and control groups with improved patient knowledge or better patient-reported outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: A variety of different interventions and outcome measures were used making data synthesis challenging. There is some evidence that interventions to increase patient involvement in decision-making can improve patient-reported outcomes and patient knowledge.