Informed patient choice is the priority for C-sections

2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (13) ◽  
pp. 33-33
Author(s):  
Becky Muckle
2021 ◽  
pp. 103985622110546
Author(s):  
James G Scott ◽  
Gemma McKeon ◽  
Eva Malacova ◽  
Jackie Curtis ◽  
Bjorn Burgher ◽  
...  

Objective: To present a practical, easy-to-implement clinical framework designed to support evidence-based quality prescribing for people with early psychosis. Method: Identification and explanation of key principles relating to evidence-based pharmacotherapy for people with early psychosis. These were derived from the literature, practice guidelines and clinical experience. Results: Key principles include (1) medication choice informed by adverse effects; (2) metabolic monitoring at baseline and at regular intervals; (3) comprehensive and regular medication risk–benefit assessment and psychoeducation; (4) early consideration of long-acting injectable formulations (preferably driven by informed patient choice); (5) identification and treatment of comorbid mood disorders and (6) early consideration of clozapine when treatment refractory criteria are met. Conclusions: Current prescribing practices do not align with the well-established evidence for quality pharmacotherapy in early psychosis. Adopting evidence-based prescribing practices for people with early psychosis will improve outcomes.


1998 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 212-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vikki A. Entwistle ◽  
Trevor A. Sheldon ◽  
Amanda Sowden ◽  
Ian S. Watt

AbstractEvidence-informed patient choice involves providing people with research-based information about the effectiveness of health care options and promoting their involvement in decisions about their treatment. Although the concept seems desirable, the processes and outcomes of evidence-informed patient choice are poorly understood, and it should be carefully evaluated.


2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josabeth Hultberg ◽  
Carl Edvard Rudebeck

Aims. To explore general practitioners’ (GPs’) descriptions of their thoughts and action when prescribing cardiovascular preventive drugs. Methods. Qualitative content analysis of transcribed group interviews with 14 participants from two primary health care centres in the southeast of Sweden. Results. GPs’ prescribing of cardiovascular preventive drugs, from their own descriptions, involved “the patient as calculated” and “the inclination to prescribe,” which were negotiated in the interaction with “the patient in front of me.” In situations with high cardiovascular risk, the GPs reported a tendency to adopt a directive consultation style. In situations with low cardiovascular risk and great uncertainty about the net benefit of preventive drugs, the GPs described a preference for an informed patient choice. Conclusions. Our findings suggest that GPs mainly involve patients at low and uncertain risk of cardiovascular disease in treatment decisions, whereas patient involvement tends to decrease when GPs judge the cardiovascular risk as high. Our findings may serve as a memento for clinicians, and we suggest them to be considered in training in communication skills.


2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (10) ◽  
pp. 1109-1116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Bakitas ◽  
Jennifer Kryworuchko ◽  
Dan D. Matlock ◽  
Angelo E. Volandes

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document