Literature DB >> 11013544

Bridging the gap. The separate worlds of evidence-based medicine and patient-centered medicine.

J Bensing1.   

Abstract

Modern medical care is influenced by two paradigms: 'evidence-based medicine' and 'patient-centered medicine'. In the last decade, both paradigms rapidly gained in popularity and are now both supposed to affect the process of clinical decision making during the daily practice of physicians. However, careful analysis shows that they focus on different aspects of medical care and have, in fact, little in common. Evidence-based medicine is a rather young concept that entered the scientific literature in the early 1990s. It has basically a positivistic, biomedical perspective. Its focus is on offering clinicians the best available evidence about the most adequate treatment for their patients, considering medicine merely as a cognitive-rational enterprise. In this approach the uniqueness of patients, their individual needs and preferences, and their emotional status are easily neglected as relevant factors in decision-making. Patient-centered medicine, although not a new phenomenon, has recently attracted renewed attention. It has basically a humanistic, biopsychosocial perspective, combining ethical values on 'the ideal physician', with psychotherapeutic theories on facilitating patients' disclosure of real worries, and negotiation theories on decision making. It puts a strong focus on patient participation in clinical decision making by taking into account the patients' perspective, and tuning medical care to the patients' needs and preferences. However, in this approach the ideological base is better developed than its evidence base. In modern medicine both paradigms are highly relevant, but yet seem to belong to different worlds. The challenge for the near future is to bring these separate worlds together. The aim of this paper is to give an impulse to this integration. Developments within both paradigms can benefit from interchanging ideas and principles from which eventually medical care will benefit. In this process a key role is foreseen for communication and communication research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11013544     DOI: 10.1016/s0738-3991(99)00087-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  112 in total

Review 1.  Intuition and evidence--uneasy bedfellows?

Authors:  Trisha Greenhalgh
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 2.  Case report of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation.

Authors:  Shmuel Reis; Doron Hermoni; Pnina Livingstone; Jeffrey Borkan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-11-02

3.  The clinical encounter--the focal point of patient-centred care.

Authors:  Paul Dieppe; Ann-Marie Rafferty; Alison Kitson
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 4.  Ethics of evidence based medicine in the primary care setting.

Authors:  A Slowther; S Ford; T Schofield
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 5.  Patients' perceptions of sharing in decisions: a systematic review of interventions to enhance shared decision making in routine clinical practice.

Authors:  France Légaré; Stéphane Turcotte; Dawn Stacey; Stéphane Ratté; Jennifer Kryworuchko; Ian D Graham
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.883

6.  Measuring Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening: What are the Implications for Moving Forward?

Authors:  Deborah Marshall; S Elizabeth McGregor; Gillian Currie
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2010-06-01       Impact factor: 3.883

7.  Limits of evidence-based surgery.

Authors:  Karem Slim
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Segmenting patients and physicians using preferences from discrete choice experiments.

Authors:  Ken Deal
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

9.  How do stakeholder groups vary in a Delphi technique about primary mental health care and what factors influence their ratings?

Authors:  S M Campbell; T Shield; A Rogers; L Gask
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2004-12

Review 10.  Cohort study design: an underutilized approach for advancement of evidence-based and patient-centered practice in athletic training.

Authors:  Gary B Wilkerson; Craig R Denegar
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2014-06-16       Impact factor: 2.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.