Physician attitudes toward shared decision making: A systematic review

Identification and prioritization of patient-centred strategies to enhance IBD-related care for older adults: a modified Delphi approach

Background

The older adult age group makes up one of the fastest-growing groups of individuals with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). It is important to hear the perspectives of older adults living with IBD about care experiences and managing their illness. The purpose of this patient-oriented study was to identify and prioritize patient-centred strategies that have the potential to enhance IBD-related care for older adults in Saskatchewan.

Methods

The interprofessional research team, consisting of older adult individuals living with IBD, gastroenterology providers, and researchers specializing in IBD or older adult education used a modified Delphi approach to identify and prioritize strategies that may enhance IBD-related care for older adults. Thirty-one older adults with IBD participated in ranking, revising, and prioritizing statements related to their chronic illness care. Nine statements were developed that highlighted strategies for older adult IBD care.

Results

Through the consensus process, 6 statements were retained. Co-creating a treatment plan with the IBD provider was ranked as the top priority statement for older adults with IBD.

Conclusion

Facilitating collaborative relationships and understanding individual priorities for IBD-related care for older adults has the potential to enhance positive health outcomes and quality of life for these individuals.

A Joanna Briggs Institute Framework Approach to Shared Decision Making in End-of-Life

AIM

To implement shared decision-making (SDM) through a patient decision aid (PtDA) for the initiation of palliative care (PC) in end-of-life (EOL) cancer patients.

METHODOLOGY

A comprehensive Scoping Review was conducted on SDM in PubMed, CINAHL and PsycInfo. An evidence-based implementation of PtDAs was created using the Joanna Briggs Institute framework, which followed rigorous pillars: (1) context, (2) facilitation and (3) evaluation.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were identified and categorised into (1) Implementation characteristics and (2) Strategies for implementing SDM in terminally ill cancer patients. SDM should consider the decision-making location, optimal timing, participants and decision type. Strategies include professional training, PtDAs and implementation programmes. A PtDA implementation protocol in video format for deciding to initiate PC is proposed, following International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) and Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG).

CONCLUSIONS

SDM implementation should be guided by evidence-based methodological models justifying and structuring its execution, especially in complex and interdisciplinary contexts. National or international frameworks facilitate the adoption of health innovations, such as PtDAs, benefiting patients and improving their usage.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

SDM is not just a concept but an important approach to the Care of cancer patients at EOL, enhancing patient satisfaction and improving care quality. The success and sustainability of SDM hinge on the fundamental aspects of staff training, interdisciplinary collaboration and ongoing evaluation. The lack of specific aid in Spanish underscores the immediate need for local development. Further research is needed in this area, as most reviewed studies did not measure SDM effectiveness in diverse hospital settings.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This proposal was developed based on the experience and input of the nursing staff from the healthcare service where it is intended to be implemented.

The focus on life-prolonging anticancer treatment hampers shared decision-making in people with advanced cancer: A qualitative embedded multiple-case study

BACKGROUND

Implementing shared decision-making in oncology practice is often limited, particularly integrating the patient's context into decision-making. To improve this, we conducted a quality improvement project, CONtext. CONtext attempts to accomplish this by: (1) Integrating the patient's context into shared decision-making during consultation with the medical oncologist; (2) Actively involving the GP and case manager (a specialized oncology nurse), who often have knowledge about the patient's context, and; (3) Giving the person with advanced cancer a time-out period of up to 2 weeks to consider and discuss treatment options with others, including close family and friends.

AIM

To explore how persons with advanced cancer and their involved professionals experienced shared decision-making after the introduction of CONtext.

DESIGN

A qualitative embedded multiple-case study using in-depth interviews analysed with inductive content analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

A purposive sample of 14 cases, each case consisting of a patient with advanced cancer and ideally their medical oncologist, case manager, and GP.

RESULTS

Four themes were identified: shared decision-making is a dynamic and continuous process (1), in which the medical oncologist's treatment recommendation is central (2), fuelled by the patients' experience of not having a choice (3), and integrating the patient's context into shared decision-making was considered important but hampered (4), for example, by the association with the terminal phase.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevailing tendency among medical oncologists and persons with advanced cancer to prioritize life-prolonging anticancer treatments restricts the potential for shared decision-making. This undermines integrating individual context into decision-making, a critical aspect of the palliative care continuum.

"We will be the ones bearing the consequences": A qualitative study of barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making in hospital-based maternity care

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women involved in decisions about their care report better health outcomes for themselves and their children. Shared decision-making (SDM) is a priority for health services; however, there is limited research on factors that help and hinder SDM in hospital-based maternity settings. The purpose of this study was to explore barriers and facilitators to SDM in a large tertiary maternity care service from the perspectives of multiple stakeholders.

METHODS

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 39 participants including women, clinicians, health service administrators and decision-makers, and government policymakers. The interview guide and thematic analysis were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify barriers and facilitators to SDM.

RESULTS

Women expect to be included in decisions about their care. Health service administrators and decision-makers, government policymakers, and most clinicians want to include them in decisions. Key barriers to SDM included lack of care continuity, knowledge, and clinician skills, as well as professional role and decision-making factors. Key facilitators pertained to policy and guideline changes, increased knowledge, professional role factors, and social influences.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed common barriers and facilitators to SDM and highlighted the need to consider perspectives outside the patient-clinician dyad. It adds to the limited literature on barriers and facilitators to SDM in hospital care settings. Organizational- and system-wide changes to service delivery are necessary to facilitate SDM. These changes may be enabled by education and training, changes to policies and guidelines to include and support SDM, and adequately timed information provision to enable SDM conversations.

The perceptions and experiences of community nurses and patients towards shared decision-making in the home setting: An integrative review

AIM

To explore patients' and community nurses' perceptions and experiences of shared decision-making in the home.

DESIGN

Integrative review.

DATA SOURCES

CINAHL, British Nursing Index, Psycinfo, Medline and Social Services Abstracts were searched for qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods papers published between 1 December 2001 and 31 October 2023.

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases was undertaken using defined inclusion criteria. The included papers were appraised for quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research. Relevant data were extracted and thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Fourteen papers comprising 13 research studies were included. Patients attached great importance to their right to be involved in decision-making and noted feeling valued as a unique individual. Communication and trust between the patient and nurse were perceived as fundamental. However, shared decision-making does not always occur in practice. Nurses described tension in managing patients' involvement in decision-making.

CONCLUSION

The findings demonstrate that although patients and community nurses appreciate participating in shared decision-making within the home, there are obstacles to achieving a collaborative process. This is especially relevant when there are fundamentally different perspectives on the decision being made. More research is needed to gain further understanding of how shared decision-making plays out in practice and to understand the tensions that patients and nurses may experience.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

This paper argues that shared decision-making is more than the development of a relationship where the patient can express their views (though of course, this is important). Shared decision-making requires acknowledgement that the patient has the right to full information and should be empowered to choose between options. Nurses should not assume that shared decision-making in community nursing is easy to facilitate and should recognize the tensions that might exist when true patient choice is enabled.

IMPACT

This paper demonstrates how the idea of shared decision-making needs to be explored in the light of everyday practice so that challenges and barriers can be overcome. In particular, the tensions that arise when patients and nurses do not share the same perspective. This paper speaks to the potential of a gap surrounding shared decision-making in theory and how it plays out in practice.

REPORTING METHOD

The reporting of this review was guided by the 2020 guidelines for the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (Page et al., 2021).

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This review was carried out as part of a wider study for which service users have been consulted.

Facilitating Implementation of Shared Decision-Making in Medical Schools by Overcoming the Prevailing Challenges: A Brief Review

The emergence of shared decision-making (SDM) in the field of medical education represents a significant shift in the way how health care is being taught to medical students and practiced by healthcare professionals. The purpose of the current review is to explore the merits of SDM to students and patients, identify the prevailing challenges in its successful implementation, and suggest appropriate solutions to overcome them. An extensive search of all materials related to the topic was performed on the PubMed search engine, and a total of 20 articles were selected. The process of implementation of SDM in medical education can turn out to be extremely challenging due to a wide range of factors. In conclusion, training medical students in the domain of SDM is crucial to cultivate the skills and attitudes that are indispensable for future healthcare professionals. The need of the hour is to identify the prevailing challenges and address them by adopting a multifaceted approach.

Association Between Health Literacy and Understanding of Doctors' Explanations: The Yamagata Study

BACKGROUND

In Japan, the doctor-patient relationship has traditionally been characterized by a power imbalance that may contribute to communication gaps. To date, however, the link between patients' health literacy levels and their understanding of doctors' explanations of medical conditions and treatment has yet to be fully examined in Japan.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between patients' health literacy level and their understanding of doctors' explanations.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study analyzing data derived from 11,217 questionnaires collected in July 2021 from participants of the Yamagata Study, a community-based cohort study implemented by Yamagata University since 2009.

KEY RESULTS

The results showed lower health literacy was associated with poorer understanding of physicians' explanations, adjusting for potential confounding factors. In addition to low health literacy, factors associated with lower comprehension were being male, not having a regular family doctor, and having lower self-perceived levels of health and happiness.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that health care professionals need to communicate with patients according to their health literacy level and ensure they fully understand their medical condition and treatment. Medical providers need to create a better health-literate environment to enable patients and families to make decisions by themselves. [HLRP: Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2024;8(3):e175-e183.].

Barriers and Stimulus in Shared Decision Making Among Aesthetic Dermatologists in China: Findings from a Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

Shared decision making (SDM) is a collaborative process involving both healthcare providers and patients in making medical decisions, which gains increasing prominence in healthcare practice. But evidence on the level of SDM in medical practice and barriers as well as stimulus during the SDM implementation among aesthetic dermatologists is limited in China.

Methods

From July to August 2023, 1938 dermatologists were recruited online in China. Data were collected through an electronic questionnaire covering: (1) demographic features; (2) SDM questionnaire physician version (SDM-Q-Doc); and (3) stimulus and barriers in SDM implementation. Logistic regression was applied to explore factors associated with SDM practice, barriers, and stimulus of SDM implementation, respectively.

Results

The 1938 dermatologists included 1329 females (68.6%), with an average age of 35 years. The total SDM score ranged from 0 to 45, with a median value of 40 (IQR: 35-44), and the median stimulus score and barriers scores were 28 (IQR: 24-32) and 19 (IQR: 13-26), respectively. The prevalence of good SDM was 27.2%, logistic regression indicated that female dermatologists (odds ratio, OR=1.21, 95% confidence interval, CI: 0.96-1.51), and dermatologists with more years of aesthetic practice had a higher proportion of good SDM practice (OR was 1.44 for 5-9 years, 1.58 for 10-15 years and 1.77 for over 15 years). Moreover, female dermatologists and dermatologists with higher education level and serviced in private settings had lower barrier scores; female dermatologists and dermatologists with more years of aesthetic practice had higher stimulus scores.

Conclusion

Chinese aesthetic dermatologists appear to implement SDM at an active level, with more stimulus and less barriers in SDM implementation. The integration of SDM into clinical practice among dermatologists is beneficial both for patients and dermatologists. Moreover, SDM practice should be strongly promoted and enhanced during medical aesthetics, especially among male dermatologists, dermatologists with less working experience, and those who work at public institutions.

Patient engagement to counter catheter-associated urinary tract infections with an app (PECCA): a multicentre, prospective, interrupted time-series and before-and-after study

BACKGROUND

The risk of urinary tract infections (UTIs) is increased by unnecessary placement and prolonged use of urinary catheters.

AIM

To assess whether inappropriate use of catheters and catheter-associated UTI were reduced through patient participation.

METHODS

In this multicentre, interrupted time-series and before-and-after study, we implemented a patient-centred app which provides catheter advice for patients, together with clinical lessons, feedback via e-mails and support rounds for staff members. Data on catheter use and infections were collected during a six-month baseline and a six-month intervention period on 13 wards in four hospitals in the Netherlands. Dutch Trial Register: NL7178.

FINDINGS

Between June 25th, 2018 and August 1st, 2019, 6556 patients were included in 24 point-prevalence surveys, 3285 (50%) at baseline and 3271 (50%) during the intervention. During the intervention 249 app users and a median of seven new app users per week were registered (interquartile range: 5.5-13.0). At baseline, inappropriate catheter use was registered for 175 (21.9%) out of 798 catheters, compared to 55 (7.0%) out of 786 during the intervention. Time-series analysis showed a non-significant decrease of inappropriate use of 5.8% (95% confidence interval: -3.76 to 15.45; P = 0.219), with an odds ratio of 0.27 (0.19-0.37; P < 0.001). Catheter-associated UTI decreased by 3.0% (1.3-4.6; P = 0.001), with odds ratio 0.541 (0.408-0.716; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Although UTI significantly decreased after the implementation, patient participation did not significantly reduce the prevalence of inappropriate urinary catheter use. However, the inappropriate catheter reduction of 5.8% and an odds ratio of 0.27 suggest a positive trend. Patient participation appears to reduce CAUTI and could reduce other healthcare-associated infections.

Exploring the Implementation of Shared Decision-Making Involving Health Coaches for Diabetes and Hypertension Self-Management: Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

An emerging focus on person-centered care has prompted the need to understand how shared decision-making (SDM) and health coaching could support self-management of diabetes and hypertension.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore preferences for the scope of involvement of health coaches and health care professionals (HCPs) in SDM and the factors that may influence optimal implementation of SDM from the perspectives of patients and HCPs.

METHODS

We conducted focus group discussions with 39 patients with diabetes and hypertension and 45 HCPs involved in their care. The main topics discussed included the roles of health coaches and HCPs in self-management, views toward health coaching and SDM, and factors that should be considered for optimal implementation of SDM that involves health coaches. All focus group discussions were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants agreed that the main responsibility of HCPs should be identifying the patient's stage of change and medication education, while health coaches should focus on lifestyle education, monitoring, and motivational conversation. The health coach was seen to be more effective in engaging patients in lifestyle education and designing goal management plans as health coaches have more time available to spend with patients. The importance of a health coach's personal attributes (eg, sufficient knowledge of both medical and psychosocial management of disease conditions) and credentials (eg, openness, patience, and empathy) was commonly emphasized. Participants viewed that addressing the following five elements would be necessary for the optimal implementation of SDM: (1) target population (newly diagnosed and less stable patients), (2) commitment of all stakeholders (discrepancy on targeted times and modality), (3) continuity of care (familiar faces), (4) philosophy of care (person-centered communication), and (5) faces of legitimacy (physician as the ultimate authority).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings shed light on the appropriate roles of health coaches vis-à-vis HCPs in SDM as perceived by patients and HCPs. Findings from this study also contribute to the understanding of SDM on self-management strategies for patients with diabetes and hypertension and highlight potential opportunities for integrating health coaches into the routine care process.

Exploring Foreign Domestic Workers' Perceived Contextual Factors That Influence Their Participation in Medical Consultations: An Ecological Lens

Foreign domestic workers have reported various health problems after moving to Hong Kong, which suggests the need for them to seek medical attention. Yet, much uncertainty exists about their perception of healthcare experiences as patients, particularly how they perceive their communication with ethnic-discordant healthcare providers. Drawing on foreign domestic workers' perspectives, we extracted non-interpersonal factors from Street's ecological model and its extension proposed by Head and Bute (2018) and examined how foreign domestic workers perceived these contextual factors affected their communication with healthcare providers. Thematic analysis was conducted on thirty Filipina and Indonesian domestic workers' narratives. Our findings confirmed that the context of digital media (characterized by Internet use and the adoption of a telemedicine approach) and the context of social ties (characterized by employers' involvement and everyday communication with friends and peers) were both potential contextual factors that domestic workers reported accounted for their participation in medical encounters. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. Future research building on these findings is proposed.

Patient Characteristics and the Extent to Which Clinicians Involve Patients in Decision Making: Secondary Analyses of Pooled Data

BACKGROUND

The occurrence of shared decision making (SDM) in daily practice remains limited. Various patient characteristics have been suggested to potentially influence the extent to which clinicians involve patients in SDM.

OBJECTIVE

To assess associations between patient characteristics and the extent to which clinicians involve patients in SDM.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of data pooled from 10 studies comparing the care of adult patients with (intervention) or without (control) a within-encounter SDM conversation tool. We included studies with audio(-visual) recordings of clinical encounters in which decisions about starting or reconsidering treatment were discussed.

MAIN MEASURES

In the original studies, the Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making 12-items (OPTION12 item) scale was used to code the extent to which clinicians involved patients in SDM in clinical encounters. We conducted multivariable analyses with patient characteristics (age, gender, race, education, marital status, number of daily medications, general health status, health literacy) as independent variables and OPTION12 as a dependent variable.

RESULTS

We included data from 1,614 patients. The between-arm difference in OPTION12 scores was 7.7 of 100 points (P < 0.001). We found no association between any patient characteristics and the OPTION12 score except for education level (p = 0.030), an association that was very small (2.8 points between the least and most educated), contributed mostly by, and only significant in, control arms (6.5 points). Subanalyses of a stroke prevention trial showed a positive association between age and OPTION12 score (P = 0.033).

CONCLUSIONS

Most characteristics showed no association with the extent to which clinicians involved patients in SDM. Without an SDM conversation tool, clinicians devoted more efforts to involve patients with higher education, a difference not observed when the tool was used.

HIGHLIGHTS

Most sociodemographic patient characteristics show no association with the extent to which clinicians involve patients in shared decision making.Clinicians devoted less effort to involve patients with lower education, a difference that was not observed when a shared decision-making conversation tool was used.SDM conversation tools can be useful for clinicians to better involve patients and ensure patients get involved equally regardless of educational background.

Shared decision-making in palliative cancer care: A systematic review and metasynthesis

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is a key element of person-centred care and promoted as the favoured model in preference-sensitive decision-making. Limitations to implementation have been observed, and barriers and limitations, both generally and in the palliative setting, have been highlighted. More knowledge about the process of shared decision-making in palliative cancer care would assist in addressing these limitations.

AIM

To identify and synthesise qualitative data on how people with cancer, informal carers and healthcare professionals experience and perceive shared decision-making in palliative cancer care.

DESIGN

A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies. We analysed data using inductive thematic analysis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched five electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Scopus) from inception until June 2023, supplemented by backward searches.

RESULTS

We identified and included 23 studies, reported in 26 papers. Our analysis produced four analytical themes; (1) Overwhelming situation of 'no choice', (2) Processes vary depending on the timings and nature of the decisions involved, (3) Patient-physician dyad is central to decision-making, with surrounding support and (4) Level of involvement depends on interactions between individuals and systems.

CONCLUSION

Shared decision-making in palliative cancer care is a complex process of many decisions in a challenging, multifaceted and evolving situation where equipoise and choice are limited. Implications for practice: Implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice requires (1) clarifying conceptual confusion, (2) including members of the interprofessional team in the shared decision-making process and (3) adapting the approach to the ambiguous, existential situations which arise in palliative cancer care.

Ethics of Nudging in the COVID-19 Crisis and the Necessary Return to the Principles of Shared Decision Making: A Critical Review

Nudging, a controversial technique for modifying people's behavior in a predictable way, is claimed to preserve freedom of choice while simultaneously influencing it. Nudging had been largely confined to situations such as promoting healthy eating choices but has been employed in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis in a shift towards measures that involve significantly less choice, such as shoves and behavioral prods. Shared decision making (SDM), a method for direct involvement and autonomy, is an alternative approach to communicate risk. Predominantly peer-reviewed scientific publications from standard literature databases like PubMed, PsycInfo, and Psyndex were evaluated in a narrative review. The so-called fear nudges, as well as the dissemination of strongly emotionalizing or moralizing messages can lead to intense psycho-physical stress. The use of these nudges by specialized units during the COVID-19 pandemic generated a societal atmosphere of fear that precipitated a deterioration of the mental and physical health of the population. Major recommendations of the German COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) study, which are based on elements of nudging and coercive measures, do not comply with ethical principles, basic psychological principles, or evidence-based data. SDM was misused in the COVID-19 crisis, which helped to achieve one-sided goals of governments. The emphasis on utilitarian thinking is criticized and the unethical behavior of decision makers is explained by both using the concept of moral disengagement and the maturity level of coping strategies. There should be a return to an open-ended, democratic, and pluralistic scientific debate without using nudges. It is therefore necessary to return to the origins of SDM.

Trans-Inclusive Communication and Self-Perceived Barriers to It, as Reported by Doctors-A Mixed-Methods Survey in Germany

The majority of transgender and gender-nonconforming people (TGNC) report negative experiences with doctors in the healthcare system. As there is little knowledge about the communication behaviour of doctors towards TGNC, this survey aimed to assess the self-reported trans-inclusive communication of doctors and their willingness to communicate trans-inclusively, as well as their self-perceived barriers to it. A mixed-methods survey was applied for this. Firstly, we measured self-reported trans-inclusive communication behaviour based on the CommTrans questionnaire. Based on this, the overall willingness, as well as self-perceived barriers (qualitative) to communication, were assessed. In total, N = 57 doctors took part in the survey. Most participants reported not introducing themselves using pronouns (79.4%). Of these, 61.4% said that they would not be able to do this in the future either. Perceived barriers were classified into the following eight categories: necessity, sample-dependency, habit, structural barriers in practice, uncertainties in dealing with the topic, limits of patient-centredness, gender as a binary concept, and transphobia. In summary, doctors in Germany show different degrees of trans-inclusive communication. It is likely that this has a negative effect on TGNC, their health and access to the healthcare system.

Evaluating shared decision making for dialysis initiation: A qualitative study on patient refusal of long-term dialysis in Taiwan

RATIONALE

Previous studies have explored shared decision making (SDM) implementation to determine the renal replacement therapy modality; however, the SDM approach for dialysis initiation, especially when patients refuse physician suggestions for long-term dialysis, remains unclear.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to explore physicians' responses towards patients' refusal of long-term dialysis during the SDM process and the thinking processes of both physicians and patients regarding dialysis refusal.

METHOD

We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 10 patients diagnosed with end-stage renal disease, each of whom refused long-term dialysis after physicians employed the SDM framework, and nine nephrologists at the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, from March to May 2020. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and translated from Mandarin to English. They were then thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Three main themes on dialysis initiation SDM implementation and the differences between physician and patient perceptions on patient treatment refusal were yielded. While the SDM approach for dialysis initiation developed by nephrologists in Taiwan respects patient decisions, physicians often actively persuade patients to undergo dialysis in case of treatment refusal. The motivation behind this approach is to promote the patient's best medical interests, particularly post-dialysis life quality, and to ensure a 'rational' medical decision is made. However, patients' perceptions of treatment refusal differ significantly from those of physicians, and their decision-making process is often iterative and based on comprehensive evaluation of immediate concerns beyond biomedical factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that the current physician-led SDM approach for dialysis initiation characterises active persuasion with physicians' perspectives predominating the clinical encounter. To improve SDM implementation, we propose that physicians should acknowledge and understand patients' reasoning for dialysis refusal and the distinction between objective health and subjective well-being during the decision-making process.

Shared decision-making performance of general practice residents: an observational study combining observer, resident, and patient perspectives

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is considered fundamental to person-centred care. However, applying SDM may be a challenge for residents in general practice, since it is a complex competence that requires the integration of knowledge and skills from several competency domains.

OBJECTIVE

To support learning of SDM during medical residency, we aimed to gain insight in Dutch residents' observed and perceived SDM performance in general practice.

METHODS

We evaluated residents' SDM performance from an observer, resident, and patient perspective. Consultations of first- and third-year residents were recorded. Trained observers used the validated Observing Patient Involvement (OPTION5) scale to assess observed SDM performance of residents in 98 actual recorded consultations. Perceived SDM performance was evaluated by residents and patients completing validated SDM questionnaires, supplemented with questions about (the context of) the consultation and perceived relevance of SDM immediately after the consultation. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics (mean, SD, minimums, and maximums) and explorative bivariate analyses.

RESULTS

The residents' observed mean SDM performance was 19.1 (range, 0-100, SD = 10.9), mean resident self-reported SDM performance was 56.9 (range, 0-100, SD = 18.5), and mean patient-reported SDM performance was 73.3 (range, 0-100, SD = 26.8). We found a significant and positive correlation between observed SDM performance and residents' perceived relevance of SDM for the consultation (t = 4.571, P ≤ 0.001) and the duration of the consultation (r = 0.390, P ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that there is room for increasing awareness of the potential incongruence between observed and perceived SDM performance during medical residency, in order to facilitate the implementation of SDM in clinical practice.

Voices of the Future: Junior Physicians' Experiences of Discussing Life-Sustaining Treatments With Hospitalized Patients

OBJECTIVES

Life-sustaining treatments (LST) aim to prolong life without reversing the underlying medical condition. Being associated with a high risk of developing unwanted adverse outcomes, decisions about LST are routinely discussed with patients at hospital admission, particularly when it comes to cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Physicians may encounter many challenges when enforcing shared decision-making in this domain. In this study, we map out how junior physicians in Southern Switzerland refer to their experiences when conducting LST discussions with hospitalized patients and their learning strategies related to this.

METHODS

In this qualitative exploratory study, we conducted semi-directive interviews with junior physicians working at the regional public hospital in Southern Switzerland and analyzed them with an inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Nine physicians participated. We identified 3 themes: emotional burden, learning strategies and practices for conducting discussions. Participants reported feeling unprepared and often distressed when discussing LST with patients. Factors associated with emotional burden were related to the context and to how physicians developed and managed their emotions. Participants signaled having received insufficient education to prepare for discussing LST. They reported learning to discuss LST essentially through trial and error but particularly appreciated the possibility of mentoring and experiential training. Explanations that physicians gave about LST took into account patients' frequent misconceptions. Physicians reported feeling under pressure to ensure that decisions documented were medically indicated and being more at ease when patients decided by themselves to limit treatments. Communication was deemed as an important skill.

CONCLUSIONS

Junior physicians experienced conducting LST discussions as challenging and felt caught between advocating for medically relevant decisions and respecting patients' autonomy. Participants reported a substantive emotional burden and feeling unprepared for this task, essentially because of a lack of adequate training. Interventions aiming to ameliorate junior physicians' competency in discussing LST can positively affect their personal experiences and decisional outcomes.

Navigating two 'truths': a qualitative study of physician-led end-of-life decision-making for children with life-limiting conditions

OBJECTIVE

To describe how paediatricians undertake the process of end-of-life decision-making for a child with a life-limiting condition who is unable to participate in decision-making for themselves.

DESIGN

A qualitative phenomenological study using semistructured interviews based around a clinical vignette matched to the clinical practice of individual paediatricians. Verbatim transcripts underwent thematic analysis.

SETTING

Paediatricians practising in Victoria (Australia) between mid-2019 and mid-2020.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-five purposively sampled paediatricians caring for children with specific life-limiting conditions: children with severe neurodisability, oncological or haematological malignancies or complex cardiac disease in an inpatient intensive care or outpatient clinic setting.

RESULTS

A process of physician-led end-of-life decision-making was described. Paediatricians first contemplate that the child's death is approaching, then prepare themselves by ensuring there are no reversible factors at play. They then inform parents of this view and, if needed, hold discordant views between parents and themselves about the child's death in a 'fruitful tension'. Ultimately, they seek to bring parents' views of their child in line with theirs to facilitate goal alignment.

CONCLUSIONS

Paediatricians feel responsible for facilitating the alignment of parental understanding of the child's health status with their own. This is achieved either through direction or by holding differences between parental and medical truths about the child's health in tension to provide time, space, and clarity. This alignment was seen as key to enabling end-of-life treatment decisions, without which conflict in end-of-life decision-making can arise or persist.

Patient-Provider Shared Decision-Making, Trust, and Opioid Misuse Among US Veterans Prescribed Long-Term Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain

BACKGROUND

Patient-provider shared decision-making is associated with better treatment adherence and pain outcomes in opioid-specific pain management. One possible mechanism through which shared decision-making may impact pain management outcomes is trust in one's prescribing provider. Elucidating relationships between factors that enhance the patient-provider relationship, such as shared decision-making and trust, may reduce risks associated with opioid treatment, such as opioid misuse.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the mediating effect of trust in one's prescribing provider on the relationship between shared decision-making and current opioid misuse.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis of data from a prospective cohort study of US Veterans (N = 1273) prescribed long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic non-cancer pain.

PARTICIPANTS

Eligibility criteria included being prescribed LTOT, ability to speak and read English, and access to a telephone. Veterans were excluded if they had a cancer diagnosis, received opioid agonist therapy for opioid use disorder, or evidence of pending discontinuation of LTOT. Stratified random sampling was employed to oversample racial and ethnic minorities and women veterans.

MAIN MEASURES

Physician Participatory Decision-Making assessed level of patient involvement in medical decision-making, the Trust in Provider Scale assessed interpersonal trust in patient-provider relationships, and the Current Opioid Misuse Measure assessed opioid misuse.

KEY RESULTS

Patient-provider shared decision-making had a total significant effect on opioid misuse, in the absence of the mediator (c =  - 0.243, p < 0.001), such that higher levels of shared decision-making were associated with lower levels of reported opioid misuse. When trust in provider was added to the mediation model, the indirect effect of shared decision-making on opioid misuse through trust in provider remained significant (c' =  - 0.147, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Shared decision-making is associated with less prescription opioid misuse through the trust that is fostered between patients and providers.

An Economic Analysis of the Association Among Secondary Health Conditions, Health Care Costs, and Quality of Life for Persons With Spinal Cord Injury

Background

A previous analysis using the Canadian Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Community Survey data identified that there were individuals with a high number of secondary health conditions, high health care utilization, poor health outcomes, and unmet health care needs.

Objectives

The objectives of this study were to estimate the annual health care costs of persons with SCI who report secondary health conditions, and to determine the association between these secondary health conditions with health care utilization and self-reported life satisfaction and quality of life.

Methods

The survey respondents were divided into four groups: traumatic SCI (tSCI; those who said they received needed care and those who said they did not) and nontraumatic SCI (ntSCI; those who said they received needed care and those who said they did not). The average annual health care costs per respondent were estimated for each group. Using regression analysis, we estimated the change in average annual health care costs that were associated with an additional secondary health condition for respondents in each group.

Results

Participants who reported not receiving needed care had on average 23% more secondary health conditions than those receiving needed care. The increase in average annual health care costs associated with one additional secondary health conditions was between $428 ($37-$820) (ntSCI, receiving needed care) and $1240 ($739-$1741) (tSCI, not receiving needed care).

Conclusion

This study provides insight into potential cost savings associated with a reduction of secondary health conditions as well as an estimate of the reduction in health care costs associated with moving from not receiving all needed care to receiving needed care.

Patient satisfaction in anesthesiology: a narrative review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Healthcare is increasingly expanding its view in outcome discussions to integrate patient-reported outcomes such as patient satisfaction. Involving patients in the evaluation of services and the development of quality improvement strategies is paramount, especially in the service-oriented discipline of anaesthesiology.

RECENT FINDINGS

Currently, while the development of validated patient satisfaction questionnaires is well established, the use of rigorously tested scores in research and clinical practice is not standardized. Furthermore, most questionnaires are validated for specific settings, which limits our ability to draw relevant conclusions from them, especially considering the rapidly expanding scope of anaesthesia as a discipline and the addition of same-day surgery.

SUMMARY

For this manuscript, we review recent literature regarding patient satisfaction in the inpatient and ambulatory anaesthesia setting. We discuss ongoing controversies and briefly digress to consider management and leadership science regarding 'customer satisfaction'.

Shared decision-making in physiotherapy: a cross-sectional study of patient involvement factors and issues in Japan

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based medicine education has not focused on how clinicians involve patients in decision-making. Although shared decision-making (SDM) has been investigated to address this issue, there are insufficient data on SDM in physiotherapy. This study aimed to clarify the issues concerning patient involvement in Japan, and to examine whether SDM is related to perceptions of patient involvement in decision-making.

METHODS

The study participants were recruited from among acute and sub-acute inpatients and community residents receiving physiotherapy outpatient care, day care, and/or home rehabilitation. The Control Preference Scale (CPS) was used to measure the patients' involvement in decision-making. The nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) was used to measure SDM. In analysis I, we calculated the weighted kappa coefficient to examine the congruence in the CPS between the patients' actual and preferred roles. In analysis II, we conducted a logistic regression analysis using two models to examine the factors of patient involvement.

RESULTS

Analysis I included 277 patients. The patients' actual roles were as follows: most active (4.0%), active (10.8%), collaborative (24.6%), passive (35.0%), and most passive (25.6%). Their preferred roles were: most active (3.3%), active (18.4%), collaborative (39.4%), passive (24.5%), and most passive (14.4%). The congruence between actual and preferred roles by the kappa coefficient was 0.38. Analysis II included 218 patients. The factors for patient involvement were the clinical environment, the patient's preferred role, and the SDM-Q-9 score.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients in Japan indicated a low level of decision-making involvement in physiotherapy. The patients wanted more active involvement than that required in the actual decision-making methods. The physiotherapist's practice of SDM was revealed as one of the factors related to perceptions of patient involvement in decision-making. Our results demonstrated the importance of using SDM for patient involvement in physiotherapy.

Patient-centered care and geriatric knowledge translation among healthcare providers in Vietnam: translation and validation of the patient-centered care measure

BACKGROUND

People are living longer, and the majority of aging people reside in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, inappropriate healthcare contributes to health disparities between populations of aging people and leads to care dependency and social isolation. Tools to assess and evaluate the effectiveness of quality improvement interventions for geriatric care in LMICs are limited. The aim of this study was to provide a validated and culturally relevant instrument to assess patient-centered care in Vietnam, where the population of aging people is growing rapidly.

METHODS

The Patient-Centered Care (PCC) measure was translated from English to Vietnamese using forward-backward method. The PCC measure grouped activities into sub-domains of holistic, collaborative, and responsive care. A bilingual expert panel rated the cross-cultural relevance and translation equivalence of the instrument. We calculated Content Validity Indexing (CVI) scores at both the item (I-CVI) and scale (S-CVI/Ave) levels to evaluate the relevance of the Vietnamese PCC (VPCC) measure to geriatric care in the Vietnamese context. We piloted the translated instrument VPCC measure with 112 healthcare providers in Hanoi, Vietnam. Multiple logistic regression models were specified to test the a priori null hypothesis that geriatric knowledge is not different among healthcare providers with perception of high implementation compared with low implementation of PCC measures.

RESULTS

On the item level, all 20 questions had excellent validity ratings. The VPCC had excellent content validity (S-CVI/Ave of 0.96) and translation equivalence (TS- CVI/Ave of 0.94). In the pilot study, the highest-rated PCC elements were the holistic provision of information and collaborative care, while the lowest-rated elements were the holistic attendance to patients' needs and responsive care. Attention to the psychosocial needs of aging people and poor coordination of care within and beyond the health system were the lowest-rated PCC activities. After controlling for healthcare provider characteristics, the odds of the perception of high implementation of collaborative care were increased by 21% for each increase in geriatric knowledge score. We fail to reject the null hypotheses for holistic care, responsive care and PCC.

CONCLUSION

The VPCC is a validated instrument that may be utilized to systemically evaluate the practice of patient-centered geriatric care in Vietnam.

Shared decision making on medication use between nurses and patients in an oncology setting: A qualitative descriptive study

PURPOSE

(i) To explore patients' and nurses' experiences with medication-related shared decision making (SDM) (i.e., familiarity with the concept, application of medication-related SDM, barriers and facilitators towards its application) and (ii) to explore their role perceptions, respectively.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted in which seven interviews with oncological patients and a focus group interview with six nurses were performed. Prior to the interviews, observations of the application of shared decision making were conducted using the OPTION-12 scale. The observations were used exclusively to trigger the group discussion. Data were collected from November 2020 until March 2021.

RESULTS

According to participants, the application of SDM regarding medication by nurses in oncology is limited. Barriers mentioned were health status, medication-related knowledge, the therapeutic nurse-patient relationship, time pressures and workload. Patients valued nurses' contribution to SDM regarding medication and perceived them as key persons because of their advocating, informative, facilitating and supportive role. Individual and contextual factors determined patients' desire for involvement in medication-related decisions.

DISCUSSION

Participants solely concentrated on SDM concerning drug choice and management of therapeutic and adverse effects. The patients' and nurses' experiences and perceptions towards SDM in other domains of pharmaceutical care need further investigation.

Identifying residents' educational needs to optimising postgraduate medical education about shared decision-making

OBJECTIVE

To investigate how to optimise resident engagement during workplace learning of shared decision-making (SDM) by understanding their educational needs.

METHODS

A qualitative multicentre study was conducted using video-stimulated interviews with 17 residents in General Practice. Video recordings of residents' recent clinical encounters were used to facilitate reflection on their educational needs.

RESULTS

Data analysis resulted in five themes regarding residents' educational needs for learning SDM: acquiring knowledge and skills needed to perform SDM; practising SDM; reflection and feedback; longitudinal and integrated training; and awareness and motivation for performing SDM.

CONCLUSION

Residents expressed a need for continuous attention to be paid to SDM during postgraduate medical education. That would help them engage in two parallel learning processes: acquiring the knowledge and skills necessary to perform SDM, and practising SDM in the clinical workplace. Alignment between the educational curriculum, workplace learning and resident learning activities is essential to operationalise SDM attitude, knowledge and skills into clinical performance.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The identified educational needs provide ingredients for fostering the development of SDM proficiency. The findings suggest that residents and clinical supervisors need parallel training to bridge the gap between education and clinical practice when learning SDM.

Patients’ and physicians’ gender and perspective on shared decision-making: A cross-sectional study from Dubai

Background

Delivering patient-centered care is a declared objective of many health delivery systems globally, especially in an era of value-based health care. It entails the active engagement of the patients in healthcare decisions related to their health, also known as shared decision making (SDM). Little is known about the role of gender in shaping the perspective of patients on their opportunity for engaging in SDM in the Arabian Gulf Region. The aim of this study is to investigate the role of gender in shaping patients’ perspectives toward their opportunity for SDM in Dubai, UAE.

Methods

This study utilized a cross-sectional survey consisting of sociodemographic questions and the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). A total of 50 physicians (25 females and 25 males), practicing at a large private healthcare delivery network in Dubai, were recruited using convenience sampling. Ten patients of every recruited physician (5 male and 5 female) were surveyed (i.e., a total of 500 patients). Statistical analysis assessed the differences in patients’ perceptions of physician SDM attitude scores by physicians’ and patients’ gender using independent t-test, ANOVA-test, and Chi-square analyses.

Findings

A total of 50 physicians and 500 patients (250 male patients and 250 female patients) participated in this study. The odd of patients agreement was significantly lower for male physicians, compared to their female counterparts, on the following elements of SDM: the doctor precisely explaining the advantages and disadvantages of the treatment (OR = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.34–0.88, p = 0.012); the doctor helping them understand the information (OR = 0.47, 95%CI: 0.23–0.97, p = 0.038), the doctor asking about preferred treatment option (OR = 0.52, 95%CI: 0.35–0.77, p = 0.001), and the doctor thoroughly weighting the different treatment options (OR = 0.60, 95%CI: 0.41–0.90, p = 0.013). No significant associations were observed between patients’ gender and their perception of their opportunity for SDM. Likewise, no significant associations were observed between the same or different physician-patient gender and patients’ perception of physicians’ SDM attitudes. Statistically significant associations were observed between physician-patient gender and preferred treatment option for patients (p = 0.012).

Conclusion

Study findings suggest that while there were no differences in patients’ perspective on SDM by the gender of patients, significant differences were observed by the gender of physicians. Female physicians, compared to their male counterparts, were more engaged in SDM, with both male and female patients. Male physician-female patient dyad received the lowest scores on SDM. This could be explained by the cultural, social, and religious sensitivities that infiltrate the physician-patient relationship in the Arab contexts. Despite the multi-cultural nature of the country, some female patients may still experience some discomfort in opening up and in discussion preferences with male physicians. For physicians, striking the right balance between assertiveness and SDM is necessary within the cultural context, especially among male providers. Offering targeted learning and development programs on the importance and practice of SDM is also necessary to ensure equitable opportunity for engagement in SDM for all patients irrespective of the gender of their provider.

Speech recognition can help evaluate shared decision making and predict medication adherence in primary care setting

OBJECTIVE

Asthma is a common chronic illness affecting 19 million US adults. Inhaled corticosteroids are a safe and effective treatment for asthma, yet, medication adherence among patients remains poor. Shared decision-making, a patient activation strategy, can improve patient adherence to inhaled corticosteroids. This study aimed to explore whether audio-recorded patient-primary care provider encounters can be used to: 1. Evaluate the level of patient-perceived shared decision-making during the encounter, and 2. Predict levels of patient's inhaled corticosteroid adherence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Shared decision-making and inhaled corticosteroid adherence were assessed using the SDM Questionnaire-9 and the Medication Adherence Report Scale for Asthma (MARS-A). Speech-to-text algorithms were used to automatically transcribe 80 audio-recorded encounters between primary care providers and asthmatic patients. Machine learning algorithms (Naive Bayes, Support Vector Machines, Decision Tree) were applied to achieve the study's predictive goals.

RESULTS

The accuracy of automated speech-to-text transcription was relatively high (ROUGE F-score = .9). Machine learning algorithms achieved good predictive performance for shared decision-making (the highest F-score = .88 for the Naive Bayes) and inhaled corticosteroid adherence (the highest F-score = .87 for the Support Vector Machines).

DISCUSSION

This was the first study that trained machine learning algorithms on a dataset of audio-recorded patient-primary care provider encounters to successfully evaluate the quality of SDM and predict patient inhaled corticosteroid adherence.

CONCLUSION

Machine learning approaches can help primary care providers identify patients at risk for poor medication adherence and evaluate the quality of care by measuring levels of shared decision-making. Further work should explore the replicability of our results in larger samples and additional health domains.

Development of an adjective-selection measure evaluating clinicians' attitudes towards using patient decision aids: The ADOPT measure

BACKGROUND

The implementation of shared decision-making and patient decision aids (PDAs) is impeded by clinicians' attitudes.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a measure of clinician attitude towards PDAs.

METHODS

To develop the ADOPT measure, we used four stages, culminating in measure responses by medically qualified clinicians, 25 from each of the following specialties: emergency medicine, family medicine, oncology, obstetrics and gynaecology, orthopaedics, and psychiatry. To assess validity, we also posed three questions to assess the participants' attitudinal and behavioural endorsement of PDAs. Allocating a point per adjective, we calculated the sum as well as positive and negative scores. We used univariate logistic regression to determine associations between the scores and attitudinal or behavioural endorsements.

RESULTS

152 clinicians completed the measure. 'Time-saving' (39%) and 'easy' (34%) were the most frequently selected adjectives. 'Time-consuming' and 'unfamiliar' were the most frequently selected negative adjectives (both 19%). The sum scores were significantly associated with behavioural endorsement of PDAs.

DISCUSSION

Clinicians were able to respond to adjective-selection methods and the ADOPT measure could help assess clinician attitudes to PDAs. Validation will require further research.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The ADOPT measure could help identify the extent and source of attitudinal resistance.

The development and feasibility study of Multidisciplinary Timely Undertaken Advance Care Planning conversations at the outpatient clinic: the MUTUAL intervention

Background

Patients still receive non-beneficial treatments when nearing the end of life. Advance care planning (ACP) interventions have shown to positively influence compliance with end of life wishes. Hospital physicians seem to miss opportunities to engage in ACP, whereas patients visiting the outpatient clinic usually have one or more chronic conditions and are at risk for medical emergencies. So far, implemented ACP interventions have had limited impact. Structural implementation of ACP may be beneficial. We hypothesize that having ACP conversations more towards the end of life and involving the treating physician in the ACP conversation may help patient wishes and goals to become more concrete and more often documented, thus facilitating goal-concordant care.

Aim

To facilitate timely shared decision making and increase patient autonomy we aim to develop an ACP intervention at the outpatient clinic for frail patients and determine the feasibility of the intervention.

Methods

The United Kingdom’s Medical Research Council framework was used to structure the development of the ACP intervention. Key elements of the ACP intervention were determined by reviewing existing literature and an iterative process with stakeholders. The feasibility of the developed intervention was evaluated by a feasibility study of 20 ACP conversations at the geriatrics and pulmonology department of a non-academic hospital. Feasibility was assessed by analysing evaluation forms by patients, nurses and physicians and by evaluating with stakeholders. A general inductive approach was used for analysing comments. The developed intervention was described using the template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR).

Results

We developed a multidisciplinary timely undertaken ACP intervention at the outpatient clinic. Key components of the developed intervention consist of 1) timely patient selection 2) preparation of patient and healthcare professional 3) a scripted ACP conversation in a multidisciplinary setting and 4) documentation. 94.7% of the patients, 60.0% of the nurses and 68.8% of the physicians agreed that the benefits of the ACP conversation outweighed the potential burdens.

Conclusion

This study showed that the developed ACP intervention is feasible and considered valuable by patients and healthcare professionals.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12904-022-01005-3.

Exploring motivations and resistances for implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: A systematic review based on a structure-process-outcome model

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision-making (SDM) as a multicollaborative approach is vital for facilitating patient-centred care. Considering the limited clinical practice, we attempted to synthesize the motivations and resistances, and investigate their mutual relationships for advancing the implementation of SDM.

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines was performed. 'Shared decision making' was searched as the mesh term through PubMed, Web of Science and EBSCO from 2000 to 2021, and the quality of literature was appraised using the QualSyst Tool. Motivations and resistances were categorized based on content analysis and the 'structure-process-outcome' model.

RESULTS

From 8319 potential citations, 105 were included, comprising 53 qualitative studies (the average quality score is 0.92) and 52 quantitative studies (the average quality score is 0.95). A total of 42 categories of factors were identified into 11 themes and further grouped into three dimensions: structure, process and outcome. The structure dimension comprised six themes (71.43%), the process dimension contained four themes (11.01%) and the outcome dimension covered only one theme. Across all categories, decision-making time and patients' decision preparedness in the process dimension were the most reported, followed by physicians' communication skills and health care environment in the structure dimension. Analysis of implementation of SDM among various types of diseases showed that more influencing factors were extracted from chronic diseases and unspecified disease decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

The major determinants for the implementation of SDM are focused on the structural dimension, which challenges the health systems of both developed and low- and middle-income countries. Furthermore, we consider it important to understand more about the interactions among the factors to take integrated measures to address the problems and to ensure the effectiveness of implementing SDM.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders articulated their perspectives on the implementation of SDM actively, and these were adopted and analysed in this study. However, the above-mentioned individuals were not directly involved in the process of this study. Protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021259309).

Healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care: a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patient centred care is commonly recommended in clinical practice guidelines to improve patient outcomes and reduce healthcare costs. Identifying measurement tools used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centered care and determining their attitudes is the first step to ensuring patient centred care is provided in the future. The primary aim of this review was to describe the measurement tools used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care. The secondary aim was to quantify healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care.

METHODS

An electronic database search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL from inception until March 1, 2021, with combined terms relating to 'patient centred care', 'attitudes', and 'healthcare students'. Studies that quantitatively assessed healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care were included. Measurement tools used in the included studies were qualitatively described. Meta-analysis was conducted to quantify healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care and assess the respective influence of gender, profession, and study geographical location on healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care.

RESULTS

The electronic search identified 3948 total studies. One hundred twenty-nine full texts were screened, and 49 studies were included. There were 16 measurement tools used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centered care. Most studies (53%, n = 26) used the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale (PPOS) to assess patient centered care. Meta-analyses of 20 studies with 26 total groups resulted in a pooled mean PPOS score of 4.16 on a 0-6 scale (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 3.95, 4.37), indicating low attitudes towards patient centered care. Additional analyses found that women have significantly higher attitudes towards patients centred care than men (pooled effect 0.14 [95% CI: 0.05, 0.23], n = 8 studies) and mean PPOS scores appear similar among sub-groups of only medical students (pooled mean 4.13, 95% CI: 3.85, 4.42, n = 13 studies) and only American healthcare students (pooled mean 4.49, 95% CI: 4.35, 4.64, n = 5 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Several different measurement tools have been used to assess healthcare students' attitudes towards patient centred care, but the most commonly used is the PPOS. Our results indicate that healthcare students have low attitudes towards patient centred care. Future studies should evaluate if attitudes towards patient centred care can be improved during healthcare education.

Preference for shared decision-making among Arabic-speaking people with chronic diseases: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

To assess Arabic-speaking patients' preference for involvement in decision-making in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and characterise people who preferred involvement in decision-making.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional quantitative study. The conduct and reporting of this research complied with Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines for cross-sectional studies.

SETTING

Participants were recruited from outpatient clinics of 10 major hospitals in four cities in the UAE: Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah and Umm al Quwain.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients with at least one chronic disease completed a cross-sectional survey consisting of 37 items in six sections measuring variables that may influence preferred involvement in decision-making. These included health literacy, health status, unanswered questions about care and satisfaction with treatment decisions. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the predictors of patients' preferred involvement in decision-making.

RESULTS

A total of 516 participants completed the survey. One-in-four participants preferred shared decision-making. Preferred involvement in decision-making was more frequent among women, not married, unemployed, people who rarely/never had unanswered questions and participants with anxiety/depression symptoms. After adjustment, not being married (OR=1.634; 95% CI 1.049 to 2.544) remained as a predictor of preferred involvement in decision-making, while having unanswered questions (OR=0.612; 95% CI 0.393 to 0.954) and problems in self-care were predictors of a preference for paternalistic decision-making (OR=0.423; 95% CI 0.181 to 0.993).

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to the results from Western countries, this study showed that a majority of Arabic-speaking patients with chronic diseases preferred a paternalistic decision-making model. At the same time, some subgroups of Arabic-speaking people (eg, women, unemployed patients) had a higher preference for participation in decision-making. Physicians' support and changes in healthcare systems are required to foster Arabic-speaking patients' involvement in treatment decision-making process.

Patient and family involvement in Choosing Wisely initiatives: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Patients are important stakeholders in reducing low-value care, yet mechanisms for optimizing their involvement in low-value care remain unclear. To explore the role of patients in the development and implementation of Choosing Wisely recommendations to reduce low-value care and to assess the likelihood that existing patient resources will change patient health behaviour.

METHODS

Three phased mixed-methods study: 1) content analysis of all publicly available Choosing Wisely clinician lists and patient resources from the United States of America and Canada. Quantitative data was summarized with frequencies and free text comments were analyzed with qualitative thematic content analysis; 2) semi-structured telephone interviews with a purposive sample of representatives of professional societies who created Choosing Wisely clinician lists and members of the public (including patients and family members). Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and two researchers conducted qualitative template analysis; 3) evaluation of Choosing Wisely patient resources. Two public partners were identified through the Calgary Critical Care Research Network and independently answered two free text questions "would this change your health behaviour" and "would you discuss this material with a healthcare provider". Free text data was analyzed by two researchers using thematic content analysis.

RESULTS

From the content analysis of 136 Choosing Wisely clinician lists, six reported patient involvement in their development. From 148 patient resource documents that were mapped onto a conceptual framework (Inform, Activate, Collaborate) 64% described patient engagement at the level of Inform (educating patients). From 19 interviews stakeholder perceptions of patient involvement in reducing low-value care were captured by four themes: 1) impact of perceived power dynamics on the discussion of low-value care in the clinical interaction, 2) how to communicate about low-value care, 3) perceived barriers to patient involvement in reducing low-value care, and 4) suggested strategies to engage patients and families in Choosing Wisely initiatives. In the final phase of work in response to the question "would this change your health behaviour" two patient partners agreed 'yes' on 27% of patient resources.

CONCLUSIONS

Opportunities exist to increase patient and family participation in initiatives to reduce low-value care.

Perspectives of Patients and Providers in Using Shared Decision Making in Psychiatry

There is increased interest over the last decade in the use of Shared Decision Making with individuals with serious mental illness to improve engagement in treatment and clinical outcomes. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 15 individuals with serious mental illness treated in an outpatient transitional care clinic serving people immediately after discharge from a psychiatric hospitalization. Parallel interviews were conducted with a variety of clinical providers (n = 9). Using latent thematic analysis, six themes were identified including: (1) Differences in the Use of SDM, (2) Consideration of Past Experiences, (3) Decisional Power Preferences, (4) Use of SDM in Psychiatry Versus Other Areas of Medicine, (5) Dignity and Disengagement, and (6) External Forces Impacting SDM. Implications for clinical practice and research using a shared decision-making approach within this treatment setting are further discussed.

Treatment decision making (TDM): a qualitative study exploring the perspectives of patients with chronic haematological cancers

OBJECTIVES

Haematological malignancies are the fifth most common cancer in the UK, with chronic subtypes comprising around a third of all new diagnoses. These complex diseases have some similarities with other cancers, but often require different management. Surgical resection is not possible, and while some are curable with intensive chemotherapy, most indolent subtypes are managed with non-aggressive intermittent or continuous treatment, often over many years. Little is known about the views of patients with chronic haematological cancers regarding treatment decision making (TDM), a deficit our study aimed to address.

SETTING AND DESIGN

Set within the Haematological Malignancy Research Network (HMRN: www.hmrn.org), an ongoing population-based cohort that provides infrastructure to support evidence-based research, HMRN data were augmented by qualitative information from in-depth interviews. Data were analysed for thematic content, combining inductive and deductive approaches. Interpretation involved seeking meaning, salience and connections within data.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-five patients with four chronic subtypes: chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, follicular lymphoma, marginal zone lymphoma, and myeloma. Ten relatives were present and contributed to varying extents.

RESULTS

Five themes were discerned: (1) Preference for clinician recommendations; (2) Factors implicated in patient involvement in TDM; (3) Perceptions of proactive/non-proactive approaches to TDM; (4) Experiences of TDM at various points in the disease trajectory; (5) Support from others. Our principal finding relates to a strong preference among interviewees for treatment recommendations from haematologists, based on trust in their expertise and perceptions of empathetic patient-clinician relationships.

CONCLUSION

Interviewees wanted to be involved in TDM to varying extents, contingent on complex, inter-related factors, that are dynamic and subject to change according to differing clinical and personal contexts. Patients may benefit from clinicians assessing their shifting preferences for involvement on multiple occasions. Strong preferences for acceptance of recommendations was associated with cancer complexity, trust in clinician expertise and positive perceptions of patient-clinician relationships.

Approaches for Discussing Clinical Trials with Pediatric Oncology Patients and Their Families

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This manuscript aims to describe evidence-based best practices to guide clinicians in communicating with pediatric patients and their families about clinical trial enrollment.

RECENT FINDINGS

The standard paradigm for discussing clinical trial enrollment with pediatric oncology patients and their families inconsistently enables or facilitates true informed consent. Evidence exists to suggest that adopting a shared decision-making approach may improve patient and family understanding. When navigating communication about clinical trials, clinicians should integrate the following evidence-based communication approaches: (1) extend dialogue about clinical trial enrollment across multiple conversations, allowing families space and time to process information independently; (2) use core communication skills such as avoiding jargon, checking for understanding, and responding to emotion. Clinicians should consider factors at the individual, team, organizational, community, and policy levels that may impact clinical trial communication with pediatric cancer patients and their families. This article reviews learnable skills that clinicians can master to optimize communication about clinical trial enrollment with pediatric cancer patients and their families.

Why do medical residents prefer paternalistic decision making? An interview study

BACKGROUND

Although shared decision making is championed as the preferred model for patient care by patient organizations, researchers and medical professionals, its application in daily practice remains limited. We previously showed that residents more often prefer paternalistic decision making than their supervisors. Because both the views of residents on the decision-making process in medical consultations and the reasons for their 'paternalism preference' are unknown, this study explored residents' views on the decision-making process in medical encounters and the factors affecting it.

METHODS

We interviewed 12 residents from various specialties at a large Dutch teaching hospital in 2019-2020, exploring how they involved patients in decisions. All participating residents provided written informed consent. Data analysis occurred concurrently with data collection in an iterative process informing adaptations to the interview topic guide when deemed necessary. Constant comparative analysis was used to develop themes. We ceased data collection when information sufficiency was achieved.

RESULTS

Participants described how active engagement of patients in discussing options and decision making was influenced by contextual factors (patient characteristics, logistical factors such as available time, and supervisors' recommendations) and by limitations in their medical and shared decision-making knowledge. The residents' decision-making behavior appeared strongly affected by their conviction that they are responsible for arriving at the correct diagnosis and providing the best evidence-based treatment. They described shared decision making as the process of patients consenting with physician-recommended treatment or patients choosing their preferred option when no best evidence-based option was available.

CONCLUSIONS

Residents' decision making appears to be affected by contextual factors, their medical knowledge, their knowledge about SDM, and by their beliefs and convictions about their professional responsibilities as a doctor, ensuring that patients receive the best possible evidence-based treatment. They confuse SDM with acquiring informed consent with the physician's treatment recommendations and with letting patients decide which treatment they prefer in case no evidence based guideline recommendation is available. Teaching SDM to residents should not only include skills training, but also target residents' perceptions and convictions regarding their role in the decision-making process in consultations.

Shared decision-making in urology and female pelvic floor medicine and reconstructive surgery

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a hallmark of patient-centred care that uses informed consent to help guide patients with making complex health-care decisions. In SDM, patients and providers work together to determine the best course of action based on both the current available evidence and the patient's values and preferences. SDM not only provides a framework for the legal and ethical obligations providers need to fulfil for informed consent, but also leads to improved knowledge of treatment options and satisfaction of decision-making for patients. Tools such as decision aids have been developed to support SDM for complex decisions. Several decision aids are available for use in the field of urology and female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery, but these decision aids are also associated with barriers to SDM implementation including patient, provider and systematic challenges. However, solutions to such barriers to SDM include continued development of SDM tools to improve patient engagement, expand training of providers in SDM communication models and a process to encourage implementation of SDM.

Effect of shared decision-making education on physicians' perceptions and practices of end-of-life care in Korea

BACKGROUND

Evidence of the ethical appropriateness and clinical benefits of shared decision-making (SDM) are accumulating. This study aimed to not only identify physicians' perspectives on SDM, and practices related to end-of-life care in particular, but also to gauge the effect of SDM education on physicians in Korea.

METHODS

A 14-item questionnaire survey using a modified Delphi process was delivered to nephrologists and internal medicine trainees at 17 university hospitals.

RESULTS

A total of 309 physicians completed the survey. Although respondents reported that 69.9% of their practical decisions were made using SDM, 59.9% reported that it is not being applied appropriately. Only 12.3% of respondents had received education on SDM as part of their training. The main obstacles to appropriate SDM were identified as lack of time (46.0%), educational materials and tools (29.4%), and education on SDM (24.3%). Although only a few respondents had received training on SDM, the proportion of those who thought they were using SDM appropriately in actual practice was high; the proportion of those who chose lack of time and education as factors that hindered the proper application of SDM was low.

CONCLUSION

The majority of respondents believed that SDM was not being implemented properly in Korea, despite its use in actual practice. To improve the effectiveness of SDM in the Korean medical system, appropriate training programs and supplemental policies that guarantee sufficient application time are required.

Evaluation of a national programme to improve shared decision-making skills among junior medical doctors in Denmark: a mixed methods study of satisfaction, usefulness, and dissemination of learning outcomes in clinical practice

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a cornerstone in patient-centred care and there has been an increase in programmes aiming to improve clinicians’ abilities to engage in it. However, the evidence for such programmes’ effectiveness on clinicians’ use of SDM in clinical practice is sparse. The SDM Ambassador course, developed and facilitated by the Danish Association of Junior Doctors in Denmark (Junior Doctors Denmark) is a Danish SDM training programme for junior medical doctors (JMDs). This study aims to evaluate the SDM Ambassador course, with a focus on satisfaction, usefulness, and dissemination of learning outcomes in clinical practice.

Methods

This is a mixed methods study, consisting of an online survey followed by semi-structured interviews. The participants were JMDs who had trained to be SDM ambassadors between May 2016 and September 2020 (n=185). The ambassadors were invited to participate in the survey and 112 ambassadors completed it, corresponding to a response rate of 61%. Descriptive statistics and χ²-tests were conducted. Subsequently, purposive sampling was used to identify 10 ambassadors for interviews. The interviews were transcribed, encoded, and subsequently analysed thematically. Finally, the quantitative and qualitative results were integrated.

Results

Overall, the ambassadors were satisfied with their learning outcomes and experienced a greater capacity to unfold the perspectives of their patients. A majority (79%) reported that they had used SDM in their clinical practice with patients, and 59% had disseminated SDM to their colleagues. The usefulness and dissemination of learning outcomes in the clinic were shaped by the ambassadors’ perceptions of their moderate professional experience as junior doctors, and constrained by structural and cultural conditions in the context of their clinical practice.

Conclusions

Despite overall satisfaction with their learning outcomes, several ambassadors experienced conditions constraining the translation of their learning outcomes into clinical practice. To improve the efficacy of the training programme, continuous refresher courses should be added, while enhanced support at organisational and political levels is necessary for SDM to become an integral feature of the clinical encounter.

Trial registration

Not applicable.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07639-6.

Boundary Objects as Dialogical Learning Accelerators for Social Change in Design for Health: Systematic Review

Background

Boundary objects can add value for innovative design and implementation research in health care through their organizational focus and the dynamic structure between ill-structured and tailored use. However, when innovation is approached as a boundary object, more attention will need to be paid to the preimplementation phase. Research and design thinking pay attention to the preimplementation stage but do not have a social or organizational focus per se. The integration of boundary objects in design methodologies can provide a more social and organizational focus in innovative design projects by mapping out the mechanisms that occur at boundaries during design. Four dialogical learning mechanisms that can be triggered at boundaries have been described in the literature: identification, coordination, reflection, and transformation. These mechanisms seem suitable for integration in innovative design research on health.

Objective

Focusing on innovation in health, this study aims to find out whether the different learning mechanisms can be linked to studies on health innovation that mention boundary objects as a concept and assess whether the related mechanisms provide insight into the stage of the design and implementation or change process.

Methods

The following 6 databases were searched for relevant abstracts: PubMed, Scopus, Education Resources Information Center, PsycINFO, Information Science and Technology Abstracts, and Embase. These databases cover a wide range of published studies in the field of health.

Results

Our initial search yielded 3102 records; after removing the duplicates, 2186 (70.47%) records were screened on the title and abstract, and 25 (0.81%) papers were included; of the 13 papers where we identified 1 mechanism, 5 (38%) described an innovation or innovative project, and of the 12 papers where we identified more mechanisms, 9 (75%) described the development or implementation of an innovation. The reflective mechanism was not identified solely but was present in papers describing a more successful development or implementation project of innovation. In these papers, the predetermined goals were achieved, and the process of integration was relatively smoother.

Conclusions

The concept of boundary objects has found its way into health care. Although the idea of a boundary object was introduced to describe how specific artifacts can fulfill a bridging function between different sociocultural sites and thus have a social focus, the focus in the included papers was often on the boundary object itself rather than the social effect. The reflection and transformation mechanisms were underrepresented in the included studies but based on the findings in this review, pursuing to trigger the reflective mechanism in design, development, and implementation projects can lead to a more fluid and smooth integration of innovation into practice.

General dental practitioners' perceptions of shared decision making: a qualitative study

Introduction As patient-centred care becomes more of the focus in healthcare, informed consent is receiving more attention in dental practice as the pinnacle principle in patient care. Shared decision making or person-centred care appears to be taking a back foot in dentistry.Aim This study aims to gain insight into the current views and perceptions of shared decision making by general dental practitioners and how it can be utilised in daily practice.Method Empirical qualitative data were collected using semi-structured interviews of nine dentists working in general practice, with an average of 30 minutes for each interview. The data were analysed using thematic analysis.Results Overall, there was a misunderstanding of what constitutes shared decision making among dental practitioners, with communication focused more on information provision rather than collaborative discussion. There were barriers which prevented full discussions with patients from occurring, some of which directly conflicted with the focus of shared decision making.Conclusion There is a need to provide more clarity of what shared decision making is and how it can facilitate person-centred care in dental practice. Dental practitioners felt that standards and guidelines were not clear; therefore, they were confused as to what was expected of them with regards to communication. More support, in the form of standardised decision-making aids, is needed to assist dental practitioners to streamline the delivery of shared decision making in primary care.

Let the Kid Speak: Dynamics of Triadic Medical Interactions Involving Pediatric Patients

Communication in healthcare represents the complex interplay between multiple individual and contextual factors unfolding over the course of the medical encounter. Despite significant improvements in patient-centered care delivery, studies of health communication typically focus exclusively on clinical interactions between adult patients and their clinicians. Much less is known about non-dyadic interactions, such as pediatric triads involving a child patient and accompanying parent. Understanding the dynamics of triadic pediatric healthcare communication is the first step toward evaluating and ultimately optimizing these healthcare interactions. Thus, we undertook a mixed-method analysis of 28 audio-recorded triadic medical interactions between healthcare providers, pediatric asthma and allergy patients, and their parents to explore the prevalence of various features of these interactions. Our findings point to mechanisms through which healthcare providers and parents may facilitate or hinder children's involvement in their own asthma and allergy care, including interruptions, unclarified technical medical language, the flow of information exchange, and the formation of dyadic conversational partnerships (coalitions) between providers and parents. Our analyses further reveal that children's participation during their medical visits was minimal (13% of the interaction). Providers in our sample elicited input directly from pediatric patients more often than from parents, though the difference was small. Taken together, these findings provide a foundation on which to develop training and communication interventions to ensure that children have a voice in their medical care.

Do consultants do what they say they do? Observational study of the extent to which clinicians involve their patients in the decision-making process

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether consultants do what they say they do in reaching decisions with their patients.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis of hospital outpatient encounters, comparing consultants' self-reported usual decision-making style to their actual observed decision-making behaviour in video-recorded encounters.

SETTING

Large secondary care teaching hospital in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

41 consultants from 18 disciplines and 781 patients.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURE

With the Control Preference Scale, the self-reported usual decision-making style was assessed (paternalistic, informative or shared decision making). Two independent raters assessed decision-making behaviour for each decision using the Observing Patient Involvement (OPTION)5 instrument ranging from 0 (no shared decision making (SDM)) to 100 (optimal SDM).

RESULTS

Consultants reported their usual decision-making style as informative (n=11), shared (n=16) and paternalistic (n=14). Overall, patient involvement was low, with mean (SD) OPTION5 scores of 16.8 (17.1). In an unadjusted multilevel analysis, the reported usual decision-making style was not related to the OPTION5 score (p>0.156). After adjusting for patient, consultant and consultation characteristics, higher OPTION5 scores were only significantly related to the category of decisions (treatment vs the other categories) and to longer consultation duration (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The limited patient involvement that we observed was not associated with the consultants' self-reported usual decision-making style. Consultants appear to be unconsciously incompetent in shared decision making. This can hinder the transfer of this crucial communication skill to students and junior doctors.

Evaluation of a multilevel implementation program for timeout and shared decision making in breast cancer care: a mixed methods study among 11 hospital teams

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of a multilevel implementation program on shared decision making (SDM) for breast cancer clinicians.

METHODS

The program was based on the 'Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations-model' (MIDI). Key factors for effective implementation were included. Eleven breast cancer teams selected from two geographical areas participated; first six surgery teams and second five systemic therapy teams. A mixed method evaluation was carried out at the end of each period: Descriptive statistics were used for surveys and thematic content analysis for semi-structured interviews.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight clinicians returned the questionnaire (42%). Clinicians (96%) endorse that SDM is relevant to breast cancer care. The program supported adoption of SDM in their practice. Limited financial means, time constraints and concurrent activities were frequently reported barriers. Interviews (n = 21) showed that using a 4-step SDM model - when reinforced by practical examples, handy cards, feedback and training - helped to internalize SDM theory. Clinicians experienced positive results for their patients and themselves. Task re-assignment and flexible outpatient planning reinforce sustainable change. Patient involvement was valued.

CONCLUSION

Our program supported breast cancer clinicians to adopt SDM.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

To implement SDM, multilevel approaches are needed that reinforce intrinsic motivation by demonstrating benefits for patients and clinicians.

Correlation analysis between physicians' evaluations of doctor-patient relationship and their preferences for shared decision-making in China

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a scientific and reasonable decision-making model. However, whether physicians choose SDM is usually influenced by many factors. It is not clear whether the strained doctor-patient relationship will affect physicians' willingness to choose SDM. Through a survey by questionnaire, 304 physicians' evaluations of doctor-patient relationship (DPR) were quantified by the difficult DPR questionnaire-8. Their preferences for SDM and the reasons were also evaluated. The correlation between physicians' evaluations of DPR and their preferences for SDM were analyzed. 84.5% physicians perceived DPR as poor or strained, 53.3% physicians preferred SDM, mainly because of the influences of medical ethics and social desirability bias. Their preferences for SDM were not significantly correlated with their evaluations of DPR (P > 0.05). Physicians with different evaluations of DPR (good, poor, and strained) all had similar preferences for SDM (42.6, 56.4, and 42.9%), with no significant difference (P > 0.05). There was no correlation between physicians' evaluations of DPR and their preferences for SDM. Physicians' evaluations of poor DPR did not affect their preferences for SDM. This may be influenced by the medical ethics and social desirability bias.