Patients' perspective on shared decision-making in urology: a prospective study at a university hospital

A scoping review into the explanations for differences in the degrees of shared decision making experienced by patients

OBJECTIVES

In order to improve the degree of shared decision making (SDM) experienced by patients, it is necessary to gain insight into the explanations for the differences in these degrees.

METHODS

A scoping review of the literature on the explanations for differences in the degree of SDM experienced by patients was conducted. We assessed 21,329 references. Ultimately, 308 studies were included. The explanations were divided into micro, meso, and macro levels.

RESULTS

The explanations are mainly related to the micro level. They include explanations related to the patient and healthcare professionals, the relationship between the patient and the physician, and the involvement of the patient's relatives. On the macro level, explanations are related to restrictions within the healthcare system such as time constraints, and adequate information about treatment options. On the meso level, explanations are related to the continuity of care and the involvement of other healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

SDM is not an isolated process between the physician and patient. Explanations are connected to the macro, meso, and micro levels.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This scoping review suggests that there could be more focus on explanations related to the macro and meso levels, and on how explanations at different levels are interrelated.

Getting specific: participation preference in urooncological decision-making

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is the gold standard for good clinical practice, and thus, psychometric instruments have been established to assess patients' generic preference for participation (e.g., the Autonomy Preference Index, API). However, patients' preferences may vary depending on the specific disease and with respect to the specific decision context. With a modified preference index (API-Uro), we assessed patients' specific participation preference in preference-sensitive decisions pertaining to urological cancer treatments and compared this with their generic participation preference.

METHODS

In Study 1, we recruited (N = 469) urological outpatients (43.1% urooncological) at a large university hospital. Participation preference was assessed with generic measures (API and API case vignettes) and with the disease-specific API-Uro (urooncological case vignettes describing medical decisions of variable difficulty). A polychoric exploratory factor analysis was used to establish factorial validity and reduce items. In Study 2, we collected data from N = 204 bladder cancer patients in a multicenter study to validate the factorial structure with confirmatory factor analysis. Differences between the participation preference for different decision contexts were analyzed.

RESULTS

Study 1: Scores on the specific urooncological case vignettes (API-Uro) correlated with the generic measure (r = .44) but also provided incremental information. Among the disease-specific vignettes of the API-Uro, there were two factors with good internal consistency (α ≥ .8): treatment versus diagnostic decisions. Patients desired more participation for treatment decisions (77.8%) than for diagnostic decisions (22%), χ²(1) = 245.1, p ≤ .001. Study 2: Replicated the correlation of the API-Uro with the API (r = .39) and its factorial structure (SRMR = .08; CFI = .974). Bladder cancer patients also desired more participation for treatment decisions (57.4%) than for diagnostic decisions (13.3%), χ²(1) =84, p ≤ .001.

CONCLUSIONS

The desire to participate varies between treatment versus diagnostic decisions among urological patients. This underscores the importance of assessing participation preference for specific contexts. Overall, the new API-Uro has good psychometric properties and is well suited to assess patients' preferences. In routine care, measures of participation preference for specific decision contexts may provide incremental, allowing clinicians to better address their patients' individual needs.

Women's Involvement in Decision-Making and Associated Factors Among Women Who Underwent a Caesarean Section in Sidama Region, South Ethiopia: Cross-Sectional Study

Background

A caesarean delivery without maternal involvement in decision-making reduces the quality of health care and breaks women's autonomy. However, the involvement of women in decision-making to have a caesarean delivery is minimal. Still, now paternalism is widely practised. The study aims to assess women's involvement in decision-making and associated factors among women who underwent a caesarean delivery.

Methods

Institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted in Sidama region Public hospitals from June 22/2022-August 5/2022, among women who underwent a caesarean delivery. The total sample size was 457. The collected data was exported from the ODK toolbox server to excel and then to SPSS version 26 for further data cleaning and analysis. The variables with a p-value ≤ 0.25 in the bivariable analysis were included in a multivariable ordinal logistic regression model to control possible confounders. The resulting odds ratio and 95% confidence interval were computed, and a p-value of less than 0.05 is considered statistically significant.

Results

Women's agreed decision-making involvement to have a caesarean delivery is 165(37.9%). Women who had an scheduled caesarean delivery [AOR: 7.6; 95% CI: 3.3, 17.8], had adequate information about caesarean delivery [AOR: 5.7; 95% CI:3.3, 10.0], had adequate time for decision-making [AOR: 4.6; 95% CI:2.09, 6.4], language of consent [AOR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2, 3.1], and women-healthcare providers relationship [AOR: 5.2; 95% CI: 3.2, 8.6]are higher odds of being involved in decision-making, but women's being primary school [AOR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.3,0.97] are lower odds of involvement in decision-making to have a caesarean delivery.

Conclusion and recommendation

In this study, women's agreed decision-making involvement to have a caesarean delivery is low compared with other studies. Women-healthcare providers' relationship and an unscheduled caesarean delivery are highly affect their involvement in decision-making. Therefore, hospitals should translate and prepare the consent form in an understandable way for women and families, and healthcare providers should develop good relationship and encourage her involvement.

Factors Influencing Participation in Shared Decision-Making Among Patients with Glaucoma in China: A Cross-Sectional Study

Purpose

To explore the level of participation in shared decision-making by patients with glaucoma and identify influencing factors, to subsequently provide references to promote shared decision-making in ophthalmology, and achieve patient-centered care.

Patients and Methods

A questionnaire was completed by 148 patients with glaucoma who had been admitted to a specialized ophthalmic hospital in China, between October 2021 and January 2022. The participants' responses to the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and a general information survey were analyzed to determine their level of participation in shared decision-making and influencing factors. Multiple linear regression was used to identify factors that influence shared decision-making at the time of clinical practice.

Results

The mean score of SDM-Q-9 was 71.73±21.27 (n=140). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that patients with negative attitudes towards participation in decision-making (P=0.023) and those who had rural insurance (P=0.017) had significantly lower SDM-Q-9 scores than those with positive attitudes and those with medical insurance. Patients who were more satisfied with their medical service had higher SDM-Q-9 scores (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Patients with glaucoma presented a high level of shared decision-making. Patients' attitudes towards participating in decision-making, the payment method of medical expenses, and the level of satisfaction with medical services are factors that influence their level of participation in shared decision-making.

When attitudes and beliefs get in the way of shared decision-making: A mediation analysis of participation preference

INTRODUCTION

Certain sociodemographic characteristics (e.g., older age) have previously been identified as barriers to patients' participation preference in shared decision-making (SDM). We aim to demonstrate that this relationship is mediated by the perceived power imbalance that manifests itself in patients' negative attitudes and beliefs about their role in decision-making.

METHODS

We recruited a large sample (N = 434) of outpatients with a range of urological diagnoses (42.2% urooncological). Before the medical consultation at a university hospital, patients completed the Patients' Attitudes and Beliefs Scale and the Autonomy Preference Index. We evaluated attitudes as a mediator between sociodemographic factors and participation preference in a path model.

RESULTS

We replicated associations between relevant sociodemographic factors and participation preference. Importantly, attitudes and beliefs about one's own role as a patient mediated this relationship. The mediation path model explained a substantial proportion of the variance in participation preference (27.8%). Participation preferences and attitudes did not differ for oncological and nononcological patients.

CONCLUSION

Patients' attitudes and beliefs about their role determine whether they are willing to participate in medical decision-making. Thus, inviting patients to participate in SDM should encompass an assessment of their attitudes and beliefs. Importantly, negative attitudes may be accessible to change. Unlike stable sociodemographic characteristics, such values are promising targets for interventions to foster more active participation in SDM.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This study was part of a larger project on implementing SDM in urological practice. Several stakeholders were involved in the design, planning and conduction of this study, for example, three authors are practising urologists, and three are psychologists with experience in patient care. In addition, the survey was piloted with patients, and their feedback was integrated into the questionnaire. The data presented in this study is based on patients' responses. Results may help to empower our patients.

Different patients, different preferences: A multicenter assessment of patients' personality traits and anxiety in shared decision making

OBJECTIVE

Patient-centered care and shared decision making (SDM) are generally recognized as the gold standard for medical consultations, especially for preference-sensitive decisions. However, little is known about psychological patient characteristics that influence patient-reported preferences. We set out to explore the role of personality and anxiety for a preference-sensitive decision in bladder cancer patients (choice of urinary diversion, UD) and to determine if anxiety predicts patients' participation preferences.

METHODS

We recruited a sample of bladder cancer patients (N = 180, primarily male, retired) who awaited a medical consultation on radical cystectomy and their choice of UD. We asked patients to fill in a set of self-report questionnaires before this consultation, including measures of treatment preference, personality (BFI-10), anxiety (STAI), and participation preference (API and API-Uro), as well as sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Most patients (79%) indicated a clear preference for one of the treatment options (44% continent UD, 34% incontinent UD). Patients who reported more conscientiousness were more likely to prefer more complex methods (continent UD). The majority (62%) preferred to delegate decision making to healthcare professionals. A substantial number of patients reported elevated anxiety (32%), and more anxiety was predictive of higher participation preference, specifically for uro-oncological decisions (β = 0.207, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide insight into the role of psychological patient characteristics for SDM. Aspects of personality such as conscientiousness influence treatment preferences. Anxiety contributes to patients' motivation to be involved in pertinent decisions. Thus, personality and negative affect should be considered to improve SDM.

Patient participation in treatment decision-making of prostate cancer: a qualitative study

PURPOSE

Despite increasing development in decision-making strategies for patients with prostate cancer, little is known about patients' individual experience and perception throughout the decision-making process. The objective of this study was to explore patients' experiences and perceptions towards treatment decision-making.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative interview study with 30 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer. We transcribed interviews verbatim and inductively identified codes. Thematic analysis was used to develop and refine a codebook that aided in the identification of themes.

RESULTS

Three key themes and nine subthemes emerged, which were as follows: I. less involved in treatment decision-making, (i) passive decisional control, (ii) lack of medical knowledge, and (iii) domination by family members; II. the right to be informed of the disease condition and to choose treatment options, (i) sociocultural influences, (ii) patients believe that they should know the true facts of the disease, and (iii) patient autonomy during treatment; and III. future consideration and advance care planning, (i) fewer future concerns, (ii) advance care planning is poorly understood, and (iii) acceptance of advance care planning.

CONCLUSION

The study results show that patients with prostate cancer have a diversity of needs to cultivate their ability to make treatment decisions, and healthcare professionals should empower patients, as well as provide decision aids or decision support for patients.

Shared Decision-Making: A Cross-Sectional Study Assessing Patients Awareness and Preferences in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Shared decision-making (SDM) has become broadly accepted during the consultation, especially when there are many options of treatment. This study aims to assess patients' levels of awareness and preferences of SDM in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study targeting patients in Saudi Arabia. Two validated questionnaires were used, the first validated questionnaire focuses on measuring knowledge, attitude and experiences of shared-decision making. The second questionnaire is the the Autonomy-Preference-Index focusing on patients' preferences for being involved in SDM. Relevant items to the study aim were chosen and translated into Arabic. Psychometric testing was conducted for Arabic and English versions and tested for content and face validity. The questionnaire administered online via social media channels, between February 2021 and May 2021. A total of 411 respondents completed the questionnaire.

RESULTS

The findings showed a positive association between awareness and preferences of SDM among patients in Saudi Arabia. In the awareness of the SDM domain, females reported higher scores than male participants (t = -4.504, P < 0.001). Saudis reported higher scores in their awareness of SDM than non-Saudis (t = 2.569, P = 0.011). Participants without health insurance reported higher scores in their awareness of SDM than those insured (t = -2.130, P = 0.034). Participants with degree have higher knowledge levels than participants with no degree (f = 10.034, P < 0.001). Females reported higher scores in their preferences of SDM than the male (t = -2.099, P = 0.036). Participants who visited private health-care settings in their last clinical encounter reported higher preferences of SDM than participants who received care in other settings (f = 2.653, P = 0.048).

CONCLUSION

The study concludes that the more aware a patient is, the more likely they prefer SDM practice. This finding can support health-care policymakers in developing SDM policies that enhance patient-centered care.