1
|
Papadimitriou C, Clayman ML, Mallinson T, Weaver JA, Guernon A, Meehan AJ, Kot T, Ford P, Ideishi R, Prather C, van der Wees P. A New Process Model for Relationship-Centred Shared Decision-Making in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Settings. Health Expect 2024; 27:e14162. [PMID: 39140244 PMCID: PMC11322820 DOI: 10.1111/hex.14162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2023] [Revised: 06/07/2024] [Accepted: 07/16/2024] [Indexed: 08/15/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION We present a relationship-centred shared-decision-making (RCSDM) process model to explicate factors that shape decision-making processes during physical medicine and rehabilitation (PMR) encounters among patients, their care partners and practitioners. Existing shared decision-making (SDM) models fall short in addressing the everyday decisions routinely made regarding persons with chronic disabilities who require high levels of support, their care partners and rehabilitation practitioners. In PMR, these everyday decisions are small scale, immediate and in service to a larger therapeutic goal. They can be thought of as micro-decisions and involve multiple practitioners, care partners and patients. How micro-decisions are made in this context is contingent on multiple roles and relationships among these relevant parties. Our model centres on micro-decisions among patients, their care partners and practitioners based on our disorders of consciousness (DoC) research. METHODS To develop our model, we examined peer-reviewed literature in SDM in PMR, chronic disability and person-centeredness; formed collaborations and co-created our constructs with rehabilitation practitioners and with care partners who have lived experience of caring for persons with DoC; analysed emerging empirical data and vetted early versions with expert scientific and clinical audiences. Our model builds from the core tenets of relational autonomy, and scholarship and activism of disability advocates. FINDINGS Our model conceptualizes four non-hierarchical levels of analysis to understand the process of micro-decision-making in chronic disability and medical rehabilitation: social forces (historical and sociological); roles and relationships (multiple and intersecting); relational dimensions (interactional and contextual) and micro-decision moments (initiation, response and closure). DISCUSSION Relationships among patients, their care partners and practitioners are the intersubjective milieu within which decisions are made. Our conceptual model explicates the process of micro-decision-making in PMR. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION Care partners (or caregivers) and rehabilitation practitioners are active members of our team. We work together to develop research projects, collect, analyse and disseminate data. The conceptual model we present in this manuscript was co-created-input from care partners and practitioners on previously collected data became the impetus to develop the RCSDM process model and share co-authorship in this manuscript.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Marla L. Clayman
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health SciencesEdith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, UMass Chan Medical SchoolBedfordMassachusettsUSA
| | - Trudy Mallinson
- Department of Clinical Research and LeadershipGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonDCUSA
| | - Jennifer A. Weaver
- Department of Occupational TherapyColorado State UniversityFort CollinsColoradoUSA
| | - Ann Guernon
- Department of Speech‐Language PathologyLewis UniversityRomeovilleIllinoisUSA
| | - Albert J. Meehan
- Department of Sociology, Anthropology, Criminal Justice, and Social Work, College of Arts & SciencesOakland UniversityRochesterMichiganUSA
| | | | | | - Roger Ideishi
- Department of Occupational TherapyGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonDCUSA
| | - Christina Prather
- Division of Geriatrics and Palliative MedicineGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonDCUSA
| | - Philip van der Wees
- Department of Clinical Research and LeadershipGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonDCUSA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Oueslati R, Woudstra AJ, Alkirawan R, Reis R, van Zaalen Y, Slager MT, Stiggelbout AM, Touwen DP. What value structure underlies shared decision making? A qualitative synthesis of models of shared decision making. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2024; 124:108284. [PMID: 38583353 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2024.108284] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2023] [Revised: 03/06/2024] [Accepted: 03/28/2024] [Indexed: 04/09/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To construct the underlying value structure of shared decision making (SDM) models. METHOD We included previously identified SDM models (n = 40) and 15 additional ones. Using a thematic analysis, we coded the data using Schwartz's value theory to define values in SDM and to investigate value relations. RESULTS We identified and defined eight values and developed three themes based on their relations: shared control, a safe and supportive environment, and decisions tailored to patients. We constructed a value structure based on the value relations and themes: the interplay of healthcare professionals' (HCPs) and patients' skills [Achievement], support for a patient [Benevolence], and a good relationship between HCP and patient [Security] all facilitate patients' autonomy [Self-Direction]. These values enable a more balanced relationship between HCP and patient and tailored decision making [Universalism]. CONCLUSION SDM can be realized by an interplay of values. The values Benevolence and Security deserve more explicit attention, and may especially increase vulnerable patients' Self-Direction. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS This value structure enables a comparison of values underlying SDM with those of specific populations, facilitating the incorporation of patients' values into treatment decision making. It may also inform the development of SDM measures, interventions, education programs, and HCPs when practicing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roukayya Oueslati
- Department of Ethics and Law of Health Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Nursing and Research Group Oncological Care, The Hague University of Applied Sciences, The Hague, the Netherlands; Research Group Relational Care, The Hague University of Applied Sciences, The Hague, the Netherlands.
| | - Anke J Woudstra
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Rima Alkirawan
- Department of Ethics and Law of Health Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Ria Reis
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Institute of Global Health and Development, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Children's Institute, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Yvonne van Zaalen
- Research Group Relational Care, The Hague University of Applied Sciences, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | - Meralda T Slager
- Centre of Expertise Perspective in Health, Avans University of Applied Sciences, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - Anne M Stiggelbout
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Dorothea P Touwen
- Department of Ethics and Law of Health Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sjövall K, Ahlberg K, Fessé P, Fransson P, Kristensen I, Ohlsson-Nevo E, Åkeflo L, Langegård U. To become part of the team-patient experiences of participating in decision-making for a new treatment (proton beam therapy). Support Care Cancer 2024; 32:442. [PMID: 38890189 PMCID: PMC11189341 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-024-08631-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2023] [Accepted: 06/04/2024] [Indexed: 06/20/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study was to explore patients' experience of participation in the treatment decision of proton beam therapy versus conventional radiotherapy. BACKGROUND Proton beam therapy (PBT) has become a treatment option for some cancer patients receiving radiotherapy. The decision to give PBT instead of conventional radiotherapy (CRT) needs to be carefully planned together with the patient to ensure that the degree of participation is based on individuals' preferences. There is a knowledge gap of successful approaches to support patients' participation in the decision-making process, which is particularly important when it comes to the situation of having to choose between two treatment options such as PBT and CRT, with similar expected outcomes. METHOD We conducted a secondary analysis of qualitative data collected from interviews with patients who received PBT for their brain tumor. Transcribed verbatims from interviews with 22 patients were analyzed regarding experiences of participation in the decision-making process leading to PBT. FINDINGS Participants experienced their participation in the decision-making process to a varying degree, and with individual preferences. Four themes emerged from data: to be a voice that matters, to get control over what will happen, being in the hand of doctors' choice, and feeling selected for treatment. CONCLUSION A decision for treatment with PBT can be experienced as a privilege but can also cause stress as it might entail practical issues affecting everyday life in a considerable way. For the patient to have confidence in the decision-making process, patients' preferences, expectations, and experiences must be included by the healthcare team. Including the patient in the healthcare team as an equal partner by confirming the person enables and facilitates for patients' voice to be heard and reckoned with. Person-centered care building on a partnership between patients and healthcare professionals should provide the right basis for the decision-making process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Sjövall
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Kristianstad University, 291 88, Kristianstad, Sweden.
| | - K Ahlberg
- Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - P Fessé
- Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Centre for Research and Development, Uppsala University/Region Gävleborg, Gävle, Sweden
| | - P Fransson
- Department of Nursing, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - I Kristensen
- Radiation Physics, Department of Haematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
| | - E Ohlsson-Nevo
- Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
| | - L Åkeflo
- Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
| | - U Langegård
- Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Department of Oncology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Asanad K, Sholklapper T, Samplaski MK, Cacciamani GE. Global online interest in finasteride sexual side effects. Int J Impot Res 2024; 36:408-413. [PMID: 36100687 DOI: 10.1038/s41443-022-00612-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2022] [Revised: 08/22/2022] [Accepted: 08/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
Prior literature has suggested that finasteride may negatively impact men's sexual health. In 2011, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) provided a warning on finasteride drug labels to incorporate sexual side effects such as reduced libido and erectile dysfunction. We aimed to evaluate global online interest in finasteride sexual side effects, their penetrance and variation, and how they compared overtime. We also aimed to evaluate the influence of the FDA label warnings on web-based searches for finasteride side effects. We utilized Google search engine from January 2004 to December 2020 to include separate trends from web searches of "Propecia," "Propecia side effects," "finasteride", "finasteride side effects", and "post-finasteride syndrome" compared amongst the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia. We performed join-point regression analysis. We compared the annual relative search volume (ARSV) and annual percentage change (APC) to evaluate for loss or gain of interest in the respective key terms. We determined that the average ARSV for "finasteride" was 14.8% in 2004 and increased significantly to 57.3% in 2020 (APC: +9.25%, 95% CI 8 to 10.5, p < 0.001). Likewise, there was significant increased interest in "finasteride side effects" (APC: +20.7, p < 0.001) and "post-finasteride syndrome" (APC: +29.2; p < 0.001) in the United States overtime. Finally, when we compared trends before and after the FDA warnings, the average ASRV of "finasteride", "finasteride side effects", and "post-finasteride syndrome" all increased significantly (p = 0.001, p = 0.014, p < 0.001), respectively. Thus, it is evident that there is a global web-based interest in finasteride and its sexual health side effects, particularly after the FDA warning in 2011. There is boosted public awareness, and thus providers should have more detailed and careful conversations with patients prior to starting a 5α-reductase inhibitor such as finasteride.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kian Asanad
- USC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Tamir Sholklapper
- USC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Mary K Samplaski
- USC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Giovanni E Cacciamani
- USC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Mattisson M, Börjeson S, Årestedt K, Lindberg M. Interaction between telenurses and callers - A deductive analysis of content and timing in telephone nursing calls. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2024; 123:108178. [PMID: 38387390 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2024.108178] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2023] [Revised: 09/15/2023] [Accepted: 01/26/2024] [Indexed: 02/24/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To explore the content and timing of verbal interaction between telephone nurses and callers, and to suggest areas for improvement. METHODS Transcribed telephone conversations (n = 30) to a national nurse-led advisory service were analyzed using deductive content analysis. Categorization of data was based on components of interaction in the Interaction Model of Client Heath Behavior (IMCHB): health information, affective support, decisional control, and professional-technical competencies. The content was described both quantitatively, based on word count, and qualitatively, using descriptions and exemplars. Transcripts were also coded according to five phases in the conversation process: opening, listening, analyzing, motivating, and ending. The distribution of interaction components among phases was explored. RESULTS Interaction primarily focused on health information, particularly during the listening and analyzing phases. Telenurses based their advice on medical facts and guided callers through the conversation process. Callers' emotions and reflections on advice were rarely discussed. CONCLUSIONS Health information dominate conversations. Interaction can be further developed, particularly with respect to acknowledging callers' emotional responses, their reactions to advice, and ensuring clarity in exchange of health information. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Findings offer valuable guidance for future development of interaction in telenursing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marie Mattisson
- Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences (HMV), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
| | - Sussanne Börjeson
- Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences (HMV), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | - Kristofer Årestedt
- Department of Research, Region Kalmar County, Kalmar, Sweden; Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden, Region Kalmar County, Kalmar, Sweden
| | - Malou Lindberg
- Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences (HMV), Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Skovgaard AL, Jørgensen MJ, Tjørnhøj-Thomsen T, Høybye MT. Tinkering with symptoms, causes and solutions: Tracing the enactments of multiple chronic illnesses in specialised outpatient check-ups. SOCIOLOGY OF HEALTH & ILLNESS 2024; 46:627-643. [PMID: 38078784 DOI: 10.1111/1467-9566.13738] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2023] [Accepted: 10/12/2023] [Indexed: 05/22/2024]
Abstract
People living with multiple chronic illnesses and an increasing need for acute care is a global health challenge, which questions the conventional ways of managing illness. A central issue is how medical practices can become more patient-centred and aligned with the everyday life of patients. Communicative strategies for eliciting the patient's goals and preferences are often proposed. In this article, we draw on ethnographic data from fieldwork conducted during 2019-2020 in health-care settings and among people living with multiple chronic illness(es) and repeated acute admissions in Denmark. Inspired by science and technology studies of chronic illness and care, we trace the enactments of illness and illness work in a patient trajectory marked by persistent symptoms and medical complexity. We analyse three medical encounters, and we show how 'tinkering' with clinical signs and utterances in each encounter constantly enacts new versions, shaping how the patient could and should live with his illness. We argue that specialised outpatient check-ups for these patients must provide space for continuous tinkering with the concrete effects of illness in everyday life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Louise Skovgaard
- Interacting Minds Centre, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
- Department of Research, Horsens Regional Hospital, Horsens, Denmark
| | | | - Tine Tjørnhøj-Thomsen
- National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen K, Denmark
| | - Mette Terp Høybye
- Interacting Minds Centre, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
- Elective Surgery Centre, Silkeborg Regional Hospital, Silkeborg, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Sommer I, Assa S, Bachmann C, Chen 陈未 W, Elcin M, Funk E, Kamisli C, Liu 刘涛 T, Maass AH, Merse S, Morbach C, Neumann A, Neumann T, Quasinowski B, Störk S, Weingartz S, Wietasch G, Weiss Weiß A. Medical Care as Flea Market Bargaining? An International Interdisciplinary Study of Varieties of Shared Decision Making in Physician-Patient Interactions. TEACHING AND LEARNING IN MEDICINE 2024:1-13. [PMID: 38577850 DOI: 10.1080/10401334.2024.2322456] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2023] [Accepted: 02/05/2024] [Indexed: 04/06/2024]
Abstract
Phenomenon: Shared decision making (SDM) is a core ideal in the interaction between healthcare providers and patients, but the implementation of the SDM ideal in clinical routines has been a relatively slow process. Approach: In a sociological study, 71 interactions between physicians and simulated patients enacting chronic heart failure were video-recorded in China, Germany, the Netherlands, and Turkey as part of a quasi-experimental research design. Participating physicians varied in specialty and level of experience. The secondary analysis presented in this article used content analysis to study core components of SDM in all of the 71 interactions and a grounded theory approach to observe how physicians responded actively to patients even though they did not actively employ the SDM ideal. Findings: Full realization of the SDM ideal remains an exception, but various aspects of SDM in physician-patient interaction were observed in all four locations. Analyses of longer interactions show dynamic processes of interaction that sometimes surprised both patient and physician. We observed varieties of SDM that differ from the SDM ideal but arguably achieve what the SDM ideal is intended to achieve. Our analysis suggests a need to revisit the SDM ideal-to consider whether varieties of SDM may be acceptable, even valuable, in their own right. Insights: The gap between the SDM ideal and SDM as implemented in clinical practice may in part be explained by the tendency of medicine to define and teach SDM through a narrow lens of checklist evaluations. The authors support the argument that SDM defies a checklist approach. SDM is not uniform, but nuanced, dependent on circumstances and setting. As SDM is co-produced by patients and physicians in a dynamic process of interaction, medical researchers should consider and medical learners should be exposed to varieties of SDM-related practice rather than a single idealized model. Observing and discussing worked examples contributes to the physician's development of realistic expectations and personal professional growth.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilka Sommer
- Institute of Sociology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany
| | - Solmaz Assa
- Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Cadja Bachmann
- Office of the Dean of Educational Affairs, Rostock University Medical Center, Rostock, Germany
| | - Wei Chen 陈未
- Department of Cardiology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, PR China
| | - Melih Elcin
- Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Elisabeth Funk
- Institute of Sociology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany
| | - Caner Kamisli
- Institute of German Studies, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Tao Liu 刘涛
- School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, PR China
| | - Alexander H Maass
- Department of Cardiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Stefanie Merse
- Empathische Interkulturelle Medizinische Kommunikation, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany
| | - Caroline Morbach
- Department of Clinical Research & Epidemiology, Comprehensive Heart Failure Center, and Department Medicine I, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Anja Neumann
- Institute of Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany
| | - Till Neumann
- Outpatient Department of Cardiology Cardio-Praxis, Bochum, Germany
| | | | - Stefan Störk
- Department of Clinical Research & Epidemiology, Comprehensive Heart Failure Center, and Department Medicine I, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Sarah Weingartz
- Institute of Sociology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany
| | - Götz Wietasch
- Department of Anesthesiology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Anja Weiss Weiß
- Institute of Sociology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Keij SM, Branda ME, Montori VM, Brito JP, Kunneman M, Pieterse AH. Patient Characteristics and the Extent to Which Clinicians Involve Patients in Decision Making: Secondary Analyses of Pooled Data. Med Decis Making 2024; 44:346-356. [PMID: 38563311 PMCID: PMC10988989 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x241231721] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2023] [Accepted: 01/22/2024] [Indexed: 04/04/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sascha M. Keij
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| | - Megan E. Branda
- Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester MN, USA
| | - Victor M. Montori
- Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester MN, USA
| | - Juan P. Brito
- Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester MN, USA
| | - Marleen Kunneman
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
- Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester MN, USA
| | - Arwen H. Pieterse
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Foo KF, Lin YP, Lin CP, Chen YC. Fostering relational autonomy in end-of-life care: a procedural approach and three-dimensional decision-making model. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2024:jme-2023-109818. [PMID: 38527787 DOI: 10.1136/jme-2023-109818] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2023] [Accepted: 03/09/2024] [Indexed: 03/27/2024]
Abstract
Respect for patient autonomy is paramount in resolving ethical tensions in end-of-life care. The concept of relational autonomy has contributed to this debate; however, scholars often use this concept in a fragmented manner. This leads to partial answers on ascertaining patients' true wishes, meaningfully engaging patients' significant others, balancing interests among patients and significant others, and determining clinicians' obligations to change patients' unconventional convictions to enhance patient autonomy. A satisfactory solution based on relational autonomy must incorporate patients' competence (apart from decisional capacity), authenticity (their true desires or beliefs) and the involvement level of their significant others. To that end, we argue that John Christman's procedural approach to relational autonomy provides critical insights, such as the diachronic or socio-historical personhood, sustained critical reflection and his recent explication of the nature of asymmetrical relationships and helpful interlocutors. This study reviews Christman's account, proposes minor modifications and advocates for an integrated three-dimensional model for medical decision-making. Clarifying the relationship among the three elements promotes an ethical framework with a coherent understanding of relational autonomy. This model not only provides a descriptive and normative framework for end-of-life care practice but also reconsiders the nature of the clinician-patient relationship and its normative implications. We further present a case study to illustrate the merits of our proposed model. Altogether, our proposal will help navigate complex medical decision-making, foster trust and negotiate shared values between patients and their significant others, particularly in end-of-life care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kar-Fai Foo
- Institute of Public Health, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Ya-Ping Lin
- Institute of Public Health, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Department of Medical Humanities and Education, School of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Cheng-Pei Lin
- Institute of Community Health Care, College of Nursing, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Cicely Saunders Institute of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Yu-Chun Chen
- Department of Nursing, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Clayman ML, Scheibler F, Rüffer JU, Wehkamp K, Geiger F. The Six Steps of SDM: linking theory to practice, measurement and implementation. BMJ Evid Based Med 2024; 29:75-78. [PMID: 37673467 PMCID: PMC10982624 DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112289] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/07/2023] [Indexed: 09/08/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Marla L Clayman
- CHOIR, VA Center for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research Bedford Campus, Bedford, Massachusetts, USA
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Fülöp Scheibler
- National Competency Center for Shared Decision Making, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
- Share To Care GmbH, Cologne, Germany
| | | | - Kai Wehkamp
- Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Schleswig Holstein, Kiel, Germany
- Department of Medical Management, MSH Medical School Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Friedemann Geiger
- National Competency Center for Shared Decision Making, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
- Department of Psychology, MSH Medical School Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Orstad S, Fløtten Ø, Madebo T, Gulbrandsen P, Strand R, Lindemark F, Fluge S, Tilseth RH, Schaufel MA. "The challenge is the complexity" - A qualitative study about decision-making in advanced lung cancer treatment. Lung Cancer 2023; 183:107312. [PMID: 37481888 DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2023.107312] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2023] [Revised: 07/15/2023] [Accepted: 07/18/2023] [Indexed: 07/25/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The value of shared decision-making and decision aids (DA) has been well documented yet remain difficult to integrate into clinical practice. We wanted to investigate needs and challenges regarding decision-making about advanced lung cancer treatment after first-line therapy, focusing on DA applicability. METHODS Qualitative data from separate, semi-structured focus groups with patients/relatives and healthcare professionals were analysed using systematic text condensation. 12 patients with incurable lung cancer, seven relatives, 12 nurses and 18 doctors were recruited from four different hospitals in Norway. RESULTS The participants described the following needs and challenges affecting treatment decisions: 1) Continuity of clinician-patient-relationships as a basic framework for decision-making; 2) barriers to information exchange; 3) negotiation of autonomy; and 4) assessment of uncertainty and how to deal with it. Some clinicians feared DA would steal valuable time and disrupt consultations, arguing that such tools could not incorporate the complexity and uncertainty of decision-making. Patients and relatives reported a need for more information and the possibility both to decline or continue burdensome therapy. Participants welcomed interventions supporting information exchange, like communicative techniques and organizational changes ensuring continuity and more time for dialogue. Doctors called for tools decreasing uncertainty about treatment tolerance and futile therapy. CONCLUSION Our study suggests it is difficult to develop an applicable DA for advanced lung cancer after first-line therapy that meets the composite requirements of stakeholders. Comprehensive decision support interventions are needed to address organizational structures, communication training including scientific and existential uncertainty, and assessment of frailty and treatment toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Silje Orstad
- Department of Thoracic Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Øystein Fløtten
- Department of Thoracic Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Norway
| | - Tesfaye Madebo
- Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Pål Gulbrandsen
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Health Services Research Unit HØKH, Akershus University Hospital, Norway
| | - Roger Strand
- Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the Humanities, University of Bergen, Norway
| | - Frode Lindemark
- Department of Thoracic Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway
| | - Sverre Fluge
- Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Haugesund Hospital, Haugesund, Norway
| | | | - Margrethe Aase Schaufel
- Department of Thoracic Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Norway; Bergen Centre for Ethics and Priority Setting, University of Bergen, Norway.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Keij SM, Lie HC, Laidsaar-Powell R, Kunneman M, de Boer JE, Moaddine S, Stiggelbout AM, Pieterse AH. Patient-related characteristics considered to affect patient involvement in shared decision making about treatment: A scoping review of the qualitative literature. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2023; 111:107677. [PMID: 36857803 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.107677] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2022] [Revised: 02/13/2023] [Accepted: 02/16/2023] [Indexed: 05/17/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To identify patient-related characteristics considered to affect patient involvement in shared decision making (SDM) about treatment. METHODS We conducted a scoping review of qualitative studies. We searched for literature across seven databases until March 2022, and included qualitative studies that focused on associations between patient-related characteristics and SDM about treatment in adults. We analyzed studies using an inductive thematic approach. RESULTS The search yielded 5948 articles, of which 70 were included. We identified many different patient-related characteristics, which we grouped into four categories related to: (1) the individual who is facing the decision, (2) the decision, (3) the relationship between the patient and the clinician and others involved in the decision, and (4) the healthcare context. CONCLUSIONS Studies report a variety of patient-related characteristics that may affect patient involvement in SDM. Amongst others, patients may need to feel informed, to understand their role in SDM, and be able to communicate. Involvement may be challenging with characteristics such as perceived time pressure, poor patient-clinician relationships, emotional distress, and severe illness. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS In order to truly involve patients in SDM, we might need to focus on characteristics such as patient emotions and relationship building, besides information provision and values clarification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sascha M Keij
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands.
| | - Hanne C Lie
- Department of Behavioural Medicine, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Norway
| | - Rebekah Laidsaar-Powell
- Centre for Medical Psychology and Evidence-Based Decision-Making (CeMPED), School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Marleen Kunneman
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands; Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Joyce E de Boer
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands
| | - Saïda Moaddine
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands
| | - Anne M Stiggelbout
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands; Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Arwen H Pieterse
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Galasiński D, Ziółkowska J, Elwyn G. Epistemic justice is the basis of shared decision making. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2023; 111:107681. [PMID: 36871402 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.107681] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2022] [Revised: 02/15/2023] [Accepted: 02/22/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is little evidence that share decision-making (SDM) is being successfully implemented, with a significant gap between theory and clinical practice. In this article we look at SDM explicitly acknowledging its social and cultural situatedness and examine it as a set of practices (e.g. actions, such as communicating, referring, or prescribing, and decisions relating to them). We study clinicians' communicative performance as anchored in the context of professional and institutional practice and within the expected behavioural norms of actors situated in clinical encounters. DISCUSSION We propose to see conditions for shared decision-making in terms of epistemic justice, an explicit acknowledgment and acceptance of the legitimacy of healthcare users and their accounts and knowledges. We propose that shared decision-making is primarily a communicative encounter which requires both participants to have equal communicative rights. It is a process that is started by the clinician's decision and requires the suspension of their inherent interactional advantage. CONCLUSION The epistemic-justice perspective we adopt leads to at least three implications for clinical practices. First, clinical training must go beyond the development of communication skills and focus more on an understanding of healthcare as a set of social practices. Second, we suggest medicine develop a stronger relationship with humanities and the social sciences. Third, we advocate that shared decision-making has issues of justice, equity, and agency at its core.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dariusz Galasiński
- Centre for Interdisciplinary Research into Health and Illness,University of Wrocław, Św. Jadwigi 3/4, 50-266 Wrocław, Poland.
| | - Justyna Ziółkowska
- University of Social Sciences and Humanities, ul. Ostrowskiego 30b, 53-238 Wrocław, Poland
| | - Glyn Elwyn
- The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, Hanover, NH 03755 USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Pieterse AH, Gulbrandsen P, Ofstad EH, Menichetti J. What does shared decision making ask from doctors? Uncovering suppressed qualities that could improve person-centered care. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2023; 114:107801. [PMID: 37230040 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.107801] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2023] [Revised: 05/12/2023] [Accepted: 05/17/2023] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Shared decision making (SDM) is infrequently seen in clinical practice despite four decades of efforts. We propose a need to explore what SDM asks from doctors in terms of enabling competencies and necessary, underlying qualities, and how these can be nurtured or suppressed in medical training. DISCUSSION Key SDM tasks call for doctors to understand communication and decision mechanisms to carry them out well, including reflecting on what they know and do not know, considering what to say and how, and listening unprejudiced to patients. Different doctor qualities can support accomplishing these tasks; humility, flexibility, honesty, fairness, self-regulation, curiosity, compassion, judgment, creativity, and courage, all relevant to deliberation and decision making. Patient deference to doctors, lack of supervised training opportunities with professional feedback, and high demands in the work environment may all inflate the risk of only superficially involving patients. CONCLUSIONS We have identified ten professional qualities and related competencies required for SDM, with each to be selected based on the specific situation. The competencies and qualities need to be preserved and nurtured during doctor identity building, to bridge the gap between knowledge, technical skills, and authentic efforts to achieve SDM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arwen H Pieterse
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA Leiden, the Netherlands.
| | - Pål Gulbrandsen
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, 0316 Oslo, Norway; Health Services Research Unit (HØKH), Akershus University Hospital, 1478 Lørenskog, Norway
| | - Eirik H Ofstad
- The Medical Clinic, Nordland Hospital Trust, 8005 Bodø, Norway
| | - Julia Menichetti
- Health Services Research Unit (HØKH), Akershus University Hospital, 1478 Lørenskog, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Dean M, Hintz EA, Baker J, Reblin M, Quinn GP, Haskins C, Vadaparampil ST. Shared Decision-Making Experiences of Couples with Inherited Cancer Risk Regarding Family Building. JOURNAL OF HEALTH COMMUNICATION 2023:1-10. [PMID: 37078713 DOI: 10.1080/10810730.2023.2202630] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/03/2023]
Abstract
Patients with hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes have a high likelihood of passing germline mutations to future offspring. Patients at risk for inherited cancer may not have started and/or completed building their families; thus, they must decide about having children and consider the possibility of passing on their germline mutation. Utilizing the Shared Decision Making (SDM) Model, this study explores family building decision-making communication processes in opposite-sex couples with inherited cancer risk (ICR). Fifteen couples completed two recorded, analogue discussions and dyadic interviews at two time points. Participants were recruited through social media and snowball sampling. The constant comparison method was utilized to thematically analyze the data. When couples discussed family building options (FBOs), several themes were identified: FBO risks, FBO considerations, genetic-related FBO logistics, and life FBOs logistics. When deliberating family building decisions, couples shared easy conversational topics (e.g. FBO options and potential child's cancer risk due to a genetic variant) and difficult/conflict-inducing topics (e.g. preparing for possibilities, parenting, emotions, finances, and timing). Last, couples self-reported primary and secondary FBOs. The findings of this study capture couples' decision-making communication process while considering their experiences. Clinicians and practitioners can utilize these findings to support couples' family building decisions considering their ICR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marleah Dean
- Department of Communication, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA
- Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Elizabeth A Hintz
- Department of Communication, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, USA
| | - Jonathan Baker
- Department of Communication, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Maija Reblin
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont, USA
| | - Gwendolyn P Quinn
- Department of OB-GYN, Grossman School of Medicine, New York University, New York, USA
| | - Carolyn Haskins
- Department of Genetic Counseling, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Susan T Vadaparampil
- Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Timmermann C, Ammentorp J, Birkelund R. Person-centred communication with cancer survivors: Exploring the meaning of follow-up coaching conversations. Scand J Caring Sci 2023; 37:243-249. [PMID: 34028082 DOI: 10.1111/scs.13007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2019] [Accepted: 04/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
AIM The aim of this study was to explore the meaning of a coaching intervention for cancer survivors. BACKGROUND Cancer survivors often experience existential concerns and worries after adjuvant treatment. A number of "care transition interventions" have been developed to improve person-centred care by empowering patients. Several of these interventions include a "care transition coach". A coaching approach to communication used in health care communication have among others shown to assists in establishing confidential relationships between health professionals, increase the patient's well-being and support the patient's experience of being met and viewed as a whole person. DESIGN This is a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews to explore the meaning of a coaching intervention. In analyzing and interpreting the qualitative interviews Ricoeur's theory of interpretation was applied. METHOD The intervention consisted of two parts: (1) a two-day training program in coaching for nurses and (2) a specially developed communication intervention for cancer survivors. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The analysis of the transcribed interview material led to the development of two themes: (1) Support in moving forward in life, and (2) An opportunity to talk about existential thoughts and worries. Our results show how the experience of cancer, even when cured, leaves the survivors with profound existential worries. The cancer survivors described how coaching conversations allowed them to express their current concerns and provided them with an opportunity to discuss wider issues than treatment, symptoms, and after-effects, which had been the main focus during treatment. CONCLUSION The time immediately after the end of adjuvant treatment can be challenging, with many existential concerns and opposing emotions. We found that the follow-up coaching conversations performed helped the cancer survivors to process many of these difficult thoughts and feelings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Connie Timmermann
- Centre for Research in Patient Communication, Odense University Hospital, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Jette Ammentorp
- Centre for Research in Patient Communication, Odense University Hospital, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Burstein DS, Chretien KC, Puchalski C, Teufel K, Aivaz M, Kaboff A, Tuck MG. Internal Medicine Residents' Experience Performing Routine Assessment of What Matters Most to Patients Upon Hospital Admission. TEACHING AND LEARNING IN MEDICINE 2023; 35:83-94. [PMID: 35067146 DOI: 10.1080/10401334.2021.2018696] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2021] [Accepted: 11/24/2021] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
PROBLEM Failure to elicit patients' values, goals, and priorities can result in missed opportunities to provide patient-centered care. Little is known about resident physicians' direct experience of eliciting patients' values, goals, and priorities and integrating them into routine hospital care. INTERVENTION In 2017, we asked resident physicians on general internal medicine wards rotations to elicit and document a "Personal History" from patients upon hospital admission, in addition to a traditional social history. We defined a Personal History as documenting "what matters most to the patient and why." The purpose of the Personal History was to understand and consider patients' values, goals, and priorities. We then conducted qualitative interviews of the resident physicians to understand their experiences eliciting and integrating patients' values, goals, and priorities in routine hospital care. CONTEXT We performed this exploratory intervention at a large high-volume urban hospital. Two teams from general medicine wards participated in the Personal History intervention. We conducted voluntary interviews of eligible residents (n = 14/15; 93%) about their experience after they completed their general wards rotations. Using the coproduction model, our aim was to explore how patients' self-expertise can be combined with physicians' medical expertise to achieve patient-centered care. IMPACT Four major themes were identified: 1) Taking a Personal History had value, and eliciting patients' self-expertise had the potential to change medical decision making, 2) Situational and relational factors created barriers to obtaining a Personal History, 3) Variability in buy-in with the proposed intervention affected effort, and 4) Meaningful Personal History taking could be an adaptive and longitudinal process. Perceived benefits included improved rapport with patients, helpful for patients with complex medical history, and improved physician-patient communication. Barriers included patient distress, lack of rapport, and responses from patients which did not add new insights. Accountability from attending physicians affected resident effort. Suggested future applications were for patients with serious illness, integration into electronic health records, and skills taught in medical education. LESSONS LEARNED Resident physicians had generally positive views of eliciting a Personal History from patients upon admission to the hospital. Overall, many residents conveyed the perceived ability to elicit and consider patient's values, goals, and priorities in certain situations (e.g., patient not in distress, adequate rapport, lack of competing priorities such as medical emergencies or overwhelming workloads). External factors, such as electronic health record design and accountability from attending physicians, may further promote residents' efforts to routinely incorporate patients' values, goals, and priorities in clinical care. Increasing familiarity among both resident physicians and patients in routinely discussing patients' values, goals, and priorities may facilitate patient-centered practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David S Burstein
- Department of Internal Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Katherine C Chretien
- Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Christina Puchalski
- Department of Internal Medicine, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Karolyn Teufel
- Department of Internal Medicine, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Marudeen Aivaz
- General Surgery, Northwell Health, New York, New York, USA
| | - Austin Kaboff
- Internal Medicine, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, USA
| | - Matthew G Tuck
- Department of Medicine, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Zhao J, Jull J, Finderup J, Smith M, Kienlin SM, Rahn AC, Dunn S, Aoki Y, Brown L, Harvey G, Stacey D. Understanding how and under what circumstances decision coaching works for people making healthcare decisions: a realist review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2022; 22:265. [PMID: 36209086 PMCID: PMC9548102 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-022-02007-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2021] [Accepted: 09/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Decision coaching is non-directive support delivered by a trained healthcare provider to help people prepare to actively participate in making healthcare decisions. This study aimed to understand how and under what circumstances decision coaching works for people making healthcare decisions. Methods We followed the realist review methodology for this study. This study was built on a Cochrane systematic review of the effectiveness of decision coaching interventions for people facing healthcare decisions. It involved six iterative steps: (1) develop the initial program theory; (2) search for evidence; (3) select, appraise, and prioritize studies; (4) extract and organize data; (5) synthesize evidence; and (6) consult stakeholders and draw conclusions. Results We developed an initial program theory based on decision coaching theories and stakeholder feedback. Of the 2594 citations screened, we prioritized 27 papers for synthesis based on their relevance rating. To refine the program theory, we identified 12 context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations. Essential mechanisms for decision coaching to be initiated include decision coaches’, patients’, and clinicians’ commitments to patients’ involvement in decision making and decision coaches’ knowledge and skills (four CMOs). CMOs during decision coaching are related to the patient (i.e., willing to confide, perceiving their decisional needs are recognized, acquiring knowledge, feeling supported), and the patient-decision coach interaction (i.e., exchanging information, sharing a common understanding of patient’s values) (five CMOs). After decision coaching, the patient’s progress in making or implementing a values-based preferred decision can be facilitated by the decision coach’s advocacy for the patient, and the patient’s deliberation upon options (two CMOs). Leadership support enables decision coaches to have access to essential resources to fulfill their role (one CMOs). Discussion In the refined program theory, decision coaching works when there is strong leadership support and commitment from decision coaches, clinicians, and patients. Decision coaches need to be capable in coaching, encourage patients’ participation, build a trusting relationship with patients, and act as a liaison between patients and clinicians to facilitate patients’ progress in making or implementing an informed values-based preferred option. More empirical studies, especially qualitative and process evaluation studies, are needed to further refine the program theory. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-022-02007-0.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Junqiang Zhao
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Janet Jull
- School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada
| | - Jeanette Finderup
- Department of Renal Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.,Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.,Research Centre for Patient Involvement, Aarhus University & Central Region Denmark, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | - Simone Maria Kienlin
- Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Langnes, Norway.,Department of Medicine and Healthcare, The South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority, Hamar, Norway
| | - Anne Christin Rahn
- Nursing Research Unit, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Sandra Dunn
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.,BORN Ontario, Ottawa, Canada.,Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.,Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Yumi Aoki
- Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, Graduate School of Nursing Science, St. Luke's International University, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Leanne Brown
- School of Nursing, Queensland University of Technology, Brisban, Australia
| | - Gillian Harvey
- Caring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Dawn Stacey
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. .,Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Driever EM, Stiggelbout AM, Brand PLP. Patients' preferred and perceived decision-making roles, and observed patient involvement in videotaped encounters with medical specialists. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2022; 105:2702-2707. [PMID: 35428525 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2022.03.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2021] [Revised: 03/14/2022] [Accepted: 03/27/2022] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess how patients prefer and perceive medical decision making, which factors are associated with their preferred and perceived decision-making roles, and whether observed involvement reflects patients' perceived role. METHODS We asked 781 patients visiting a medical specialist from 18 different disciplines to indicate their preferred and perceived decision-making roles. Patient involvement in videotaped consultations was assessed with the OPTION5 instrument. RESULTS Most patients preferred and perceived decision making as shared (SDM; 58% and 43%, respectively), followed by paternalistic (26% and 38%), and informative (16% and 15%). A large minority (n = 103, 21%) of patients preferring shared or informative decision making (n = 482) experienced paternalistic decision making. Mean (SD) OPTION5 scores were highest in consultations which patients perceived as informative (26.0 (19.7)), followed by shared (19.1 (17.2)) and lowest in paternalistic decision making (11.8 (13.4) p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Most patients want to be involved in decision making. Patients perceive that the physician makes the decision more often than they prefer, and perceive more involvement in the decision than objective assessment by an independent researcher shows. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS A clearer understanding of patients' medical decision-making experiences is needed to optimize physician SDM training programmes and patient awareness campaigns.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ellen M Driever
- Department of Innovation and Research, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands; Lifelong Learning Education and Assessment Research Netwerk (LEARN), University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Anne M Stiggelbout
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Paul L P Brand
- Lifelong Learning Education and Assessment Research Netwerk (LEARN), University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands; Department of Medical Education and Faculty Development, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Siebinga VY, Driever EM, Stiggelbout AM, Brand PLP. Shared decision making, patient-centered communication and patient satisfaction - A cross-sectional analysis. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2022; 105:2145-2150. [PMID: 35337712 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2022.03.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2021] [Revised: 03/12/2022] [Accepted: 03/15/2022] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The integration of shared decision making (SDM) and patient-centered communication (PCC) is needed to actively involve patients in decision making. This study examined the relationship between shared decision making and patient-centered communication. METHODS In 82 videotaped hospital outpatient consultations by 41 medical specialists from 18 disciplines, we assessed the extent of shared decision making by the OPTION5 score and patient-centered communication by the Four Habits Coding Scheme (4HCS), and analyzed the occurrence of a high versus low degree (above or below median) of SDM and/or PCC, and its relation to patient satisfaction scores. RESULTS In comparison to earlier studies, we observed comparable 4HCS scores and relatively low OPTION5 scores. The correlation between the two was weak (r = 0.29, p = 0.009). In 38% of consultations, we observed a combination of high SDM and low PCC scores or vice versa. The combination of a high SDM and high PCC, which was observed in 23% of consultations, was associated with significantly higher patient satisfaction scores. CONCLUSION Shared decision making and patient-centered communication are not synonymous and do not always co-exist. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS The value of integrated training of shared decision making and patient-centered communication should be further explored.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veerle Y Siebinga
- Department of Innovation and Research, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
| | - Ellen M Driever
- Department of Innovation and Research, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Anne M Stiggelbout
- Department of Medical Decision Making/ Quality of Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Paul L P Brand
- Department of Innovation and Research, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands; UMCG Postgraduate School of Medicine, University Medical Center, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Pieterse AH, Bomhof-Roordink H, Stiggelbout AM, Wieringa TH. Patient role in SDM models: Re: Berger Z, Galasinski D, Scalia P, Dong K, Blunt HB, Elwyn G, "The Submissive Silence of Others: Examining Definitions of Shared Decision Making" [Patient Educ Couns (2021) doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2021.10.026]. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2022; 105:2625-2626. [PMID: 35168854 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2022.01.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2021] [Accepted: 01/31/2022] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Arwen H Pieterse
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| | - Hanna Bomhof-Roordink
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Anne M Stiggelbout
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas H Wieringa
- Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
LoBrutto LR, Fix G, Wiener RS, Linsky AM. Leveraging the timing and frequency of patient decision aids in longitudinal shared decision-making: A narrative review and applied model. Health Expect 2022; 25:1246-1253. [PMID: 35652372 PMCID: PMC9327840 DOI: 10.1111/hex.13531] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/03/2022] [Revised: 05/09/2022] [Accepted: 05/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Shared decision‐making (SDM) is intended to increase patient‐centredness of medical decision‐making for patients with acute and chronic conditions. Concurrently, patient decision aids (PtDAs) can supplement SDM by providing information to guide communication between patients and healthcare providers. Because of the prevalence of chronic conditions, where decisions may be extended or recurring, we sought to explore how effectively these tools have been leveraged in this context. Methods We conducted a narrative review of the literature on both SDM and PtDAs, searching PubMed and Boston University's library database search tool for English‐language articles published from January 2005 until March 2021. Additional search terms focused on temporality. Drawing from our findings, we developed a combined framework to highlight areas for future research using the discussion of end‐of‐life decisions as an exemplar to illustrate its relevance to chronic care contexts. Results After screening 57 articles, we identified 25 articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria on SDM, PtDA use and temporality for chronic care. The literature on SDM highlighted time outside of the medical visit and opportunity to include outside decision partners as important elements of the process. PtDAs were commonly evaluated for process‐related and proximal outcomes, but less often for distal outcomes. Early evidence points to the value of comparative outcome evaluation based on the timing of PtDA distribution. Conclusion Our review of the literature on SDM and PtDAs reveals less attention to the timing of PtDAs relative to that of SDM. We highlight the need for further study of timing in PtDA use to improve longitudinal SDM for chronic care. The model that we propose in our discussion provides a starting point for future research on PtDA efficacy. Patient or Public Contribution Five patient consultants provided input and feedback on the development and utility of our model.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lara R LoBrutto
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Boston & VA Bedford Healthcare Systems, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Gemmae Fix
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Boston & VA Bedford Healthcare Systems, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Renda S Wiener
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Boston & VA Bedford Healthcare Systems, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Amy M Linsky
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Boston & VA Bedford Healthcare Systems, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.,Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Bomhof-Roordink H, Stiggelbout AM, Gärtner FR, Portielje JEA, de Kroon CD, Peeters KCMJ, Neelis KJ, Dekker JWT, van der Weijden T, Pieterse AH. Patient and physician shared decision-making behaviors in oncology: Evidence on adequate measurement properties of the iSHARE questionnaires. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2022; 105:1089-1100. [PMID: 34556384 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2021.08.034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2021] [Revised: 06/21/2021] [Accepted: 08/24/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We have developed two Dutch questionnaires to assess the shared decision-making (SDM) process in oncology; the iSHAREpatient and iSHAREphysician. In this study, we aimed to determine: scores, construct validity, test-retest agreement (iSHAREpatient), and inter-rater (iSHAREpatient-iSHAREphysician) agreement. METHODS Physicians from seven Dutch hospitals recruited cancer patients, and completed the iSHAREphysician and SDM-Questionnaire-physician version. Their patients completed the: iSHAREpatient, nine-item SDM-Questionnaire, Decisional Conflict Scale, Combined Outcome Measure for Risk communication And treatment Decision-making Effectiveness, and five-item Perceived Efficacy in Patient-Physician Interactions. We formulated, respectively, one (iSHAREphysician) and 10 (iSHAREpatient) a priori hypotheses regarding correlations between the iSHARE questionnaires and questionnaires assessing related constructs. To assess test-retest agreement patients completed the iSHAREpatient again 1-2 weeks later. RESULTS In total, 151 treatment decision-making processes with unique patients were rated. Dimension and total iSHARE scores were high both in patients and physicians. The hypothesis on the iSHAREphysician and 9/10 hypotheses on the iSHAREpatient were confirmed. Test-retest and inter-rater agreement were>.60 for most items. CONCLUSIONS The iSHARE questionnaires show high scores, have good construct validity, substantial test-retest agreement, and moderate inter-rater agreement. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Results from the iSHARE questionnaires can inform both physician- and patient-directed efforts to improve SDM in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hanna Bomhof-Roordink
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Anne M Stiggelbout
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Fania R Gärtner
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Cor D de Kroon
- Department of Gynecology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Koen C M J Peeters
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Karen J Neelis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | | | - Trudy van der Weijden
- Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI School for Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Arwen H Pieterse
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Gray TF, Allgood SJ, Nolan MT, Gallo JJ, Han HR, Clayman ML, Budhathoki C, Lansey DG, Wenzel J. "It All Depends": Patient and Decision Partner Experiences in Cancer Clinical Trial Decision-Making. QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH 2022; 32:887-901. [PMID: 35343318 DOI: 10.1177/10497323221083355] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
While the supporting role of families and friends has been widely recognized in cancer care, little data exist on how they influence patients' decisions regarding clinical trial participation, accounting for patients' decisional preferences. The goal of our study was to examine the process of clinical trial decision-making from the perspective of adults with cancer and their decision partners. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 patients and 12 decision partners-family and friends engaged in the medical decision-making. Themes included: (1) having the ability and confidence to make decisions; (2) gaining insight about clinical trials; (3) trusting someone in the process; and (4) realizing readiness and context. Our findings will enhance understanding of how patients make clinical trial decisions based on decisional preferences from the perspectives of patients and decision partners. The findings may also help to increase clinician awareness and inclusion of decision partners in conversations regarding clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tamryn F Gray
- 1855Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Marie T Nolan
- 15851Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joseph J Gallo
- 15851Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Hae-Ra Han
- 15851Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Marla L Clayman
- 560937Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Health Services Research and Development Service, Bedford, MA, USA
| | | | - Dina G Lansey
- Department of Oncology, 1500Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jennifer Wenzel
- 15851Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Department of Oncology, 1500Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
English K. Guidance on Providing Patient-Centered Care. Semin Hear 2022; 43:99-109. [PMID: 35903078 PMCID: PMC9325083 DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1748834] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/16/2022] Open
Abstract
This article explores the clinical applications of Audiology Practice Standards Organization (APSO) Standards 2 and 13, both of which keep us fully focused on the patient-as-person. The topics within Standard 2 include audiologists' interpersonal communication skills, specifically clarity (ensuring patient comprehension) and empathy (understanding the patient's experiences). Standard 2 also addresses the topic of health literacy, which has been recently expanded to consider not only the degree to which individuals are able to find, understand, and use information and services to inform health-related decisions but also how organizations equitably support those necessary skills. The characteristics and benefits of services provided in patient- and family-centered care contexts are also described. Standard 13 addresses audiologists' support toward overall successful adjustment as defined by the patient, including both technical and personal adjustment to amplification, nontechnical communication issues, and rehabilitation support using readily available technologies. A new assessment protocol that includes goal setting and intervention is described, as well as a patient-centered intervention strategy involving discussion of personally meaningful photographs. Both standards provide a necessary balance to our technology-reliant profession.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kris English
- School of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, The University of Akron, Akron, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Verberne WR, Stiggelbout AM, Bos WJW, van Delden JJM. Asking the right questions: towards a person-centered conception of shared decision-making regarding treatment of advanced chronic kidney disease in older patients. BMC Med Ethics 2022; 23:47. [PMID: 35477488 PMCID: PMC9047263 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-022-00784-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2022] [Accepted: 04/18/2022] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
An increasing number of older patients have to decide on a treatment plan for advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), involving dialysis or conservative care. Shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended as the model for decision-making in such preference-sensitive decisions. The aim of SDM is to come to decisions that are consistent with the patient’s values and preferences and made by the patient and healthcare professional working together. In clinical practice, however, SDM appears to be not yet routine and needs further implementation. A shift from a biomedical to a person-centered conception might help to make the process more shared. Shared should, therefore, be interpreted as two persons bringing two perspectives to the table, that both need to be explored during the decision-making process. Starting from the patient’s perspective will enable to determine the mutual goals of care first and, subsequently, determine the best way for achieving those goals. To perform such SDM, the healthcare professional needs to become a skilled companion, being part of the patient’s relational context, and start asking the right questions about what matters to the patient as person. In this article, we describe the need for a person-centered conception of SDM for the setting of older patients with advanced CKD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wouter R Verberne
- Department of Internal Medicine, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands. .,Department of Internal Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. .,Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Anne M Stiggelbout
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Willem Jan W Bos
- Department of Internal Medicine, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.,Department of Internal Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes J M van Delden
- University Medical Center Utrecht, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Karam BS, Patnaik R, Murphy P, deRoon-Cassini TA, Trevino C, Hemmila MR, Haines K, Puzio TJ, Charles A, Tignanelli C, Morris R. Improving mortality in older adult trauma patients: Are we doing better? J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2022; 92:413-421. [PMID: 34554138 DOI: 10.1097/ta.0000000000003406] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Older adult trauma is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Individuals older than 65 years are expected to make up more than 21% of the total population and almost 39% of trauma admissions by 2050. Our objective was to perform a national review of older adult trauma mortality and identify associated risk factors to highlight potential areas for improvement in quality of care. MATERIALS AND METHODS This is a retrospective cohort study of the National Trauma Data Bank including all patients age ≥65 years with at least one International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification trauma code admitted to a Level I or II US trauma center between 2007 and 2015. Variables examined included demographics, comorbidities, emergency department vitals, injury characteristics, and trauma center characteristics. Multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression was performed to identify independent risk factors of in-hospital mortality. RESULTS There were 1,492,759 patients included in this study. The number of older adult trauma patients increased from 88,056 in 2007 to 158,929 in 2015 (p > 0.001). Adjusted in-hospital mortality decreased in 2014 to 2015 (odds ratio [OR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-0.91) when compared with 2007 to 2009. Admission to a university hospital was protective (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.93) as compared with a community hospital admission. There was no difference in mortality risk between Level II and Level I admission (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.92-1.08). The strongest trauma-related risk factor for in-patient mortality was pancreas/bowel injury (OR, 2.25; 95% CI, 2.04-2.49). CONCLUSION Mortality in older trauma patients is decreasing over time, indicating an improvement in the quality of trauma care. The outcomes of university based hospitals can be used as national benchmarks to guide quality metrics. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic/Care Management, Level IV.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Basil S Karam
- From the Department of Surgery (B.S.K., R.P., P.M., T.A.d.-C., Co.T., R.M.), Comprehensive Injury Center (T.A.d.-C.), Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Department of Surgery (M.R.H.), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Department of Surgery (K.H.), Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Surgery (T.J.P.), University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Surgery (A.C.), School of Public Health (A.C.), University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Department of Surgery (Ch.T.), Institute for Health Informatics (Ch.T.), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis; and Department of Surgery (Ch.T.), North Memorial Health Hospital, Robbinsdale, Minnesota
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Juul Søndergaard ME, Lode K, Kjosavik SR, Husebø SE. Men's perception of information and descriptions of emotional strain in the diagnostic phase of prostate cancer-a qualitative individual interview study. Scand J Prim Health Care 2021; 39:476-485. [PMID: 34806534 PMCID: PMC8725825 DOI: 10.1080/02813432.2021.2004734] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To explore men`s perception of information and their possible emotional strain in the diagnostic phase of prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, PATIENTS A qualitative explorative research design was employed. Data were collected from June to November 2017. The study was set at a urological outpatient clinic at a university hospital in Norway. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten men who had been examined for prostate cancer. Interviews were analyzed using Systematic Text Condensation (STC). RESULTS The analysis revealed three themes. The theme 'Different needs and perceptions of information' illustrated that information should be personalized. Despite different information needs, insufficient information about prostate cancer may prevent some men from being involved in decisions. The theme, 'A discovery of not being alone', indicated that a sense of affinity occurs when men realize the commonality of prostate cancer. Some men benefited from other men's experiences and knowledge about prostate cancer. The last theme 'Worries about cancer and mortality' showed that the emotional strain was affected by men's knowledge of cancer and the received information. Men expressed conflicting feelings toward prostate cancer that could be difficult to express. CONCLUSIONS The findings indicate that men in the diagnostic phase of prostate cancer are not a homogeneous group, but need personalized information. Some men may benefit from other men's experiences and support. Men's emotional strain can affect their communication about prostate cancer, which should be acknowledged. Procedures that identify patients' information needs early on should be an integrated part of the diagnostic phase of prostate cancer.KEY POINTSKnowledge about men's information needs and possible emotional strain in the diagnostic phase of prostate cancer are limited.Men with suspected prostate cancer have different preferences and information needs; however, insufficient information prevents men from participating in decisions.Men experience a sense of affinity with other men affected by prostate cancer, and some men benefit from exchanging experiences.Men consider prostate cancer as a less aggressive type of cancer but may experience emotional strain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maja Elisabeth Juul Søndergaard
- Department of Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
- Research Group of Nursing and Healthcare Sciences, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
- The General Practice and Care Coordination Research Group, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
- CONTACT Maja Elisabeth Juul Søndergaard Department of Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Postboks 8100, Stavanger, 4068, Norway
| | - Kirsten Lode
- Research Group of Nursing and Healthcare Sciences, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
- The General Practice and Care Coordination Research Group, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Svein Reidar Kjosavik
- The General Practice and Care Coordination Research Group, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
- Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
| | - Sissel Eikeland Husebø
- Department of Surgery, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
- Research Group of Nursing and Healthcare Sciences, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
- The General Practice and Care Coordination Research Group, Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Koopman WJ, LaDonna KA, Anne Kinsella E, Venance SL, Watling CJ. Getting airtime: Exploring how patients shape the stories they tell health practitioners. MEDICAL EDUCATION 2021; 55:1142-1151. [PMID: 33979015 DOI: 10.1111/medu.14561] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2020] [Revised: 05/04/2021] [Accepted: 05/06/2021] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Effective communication during health encounters is known to decrease patient complaints, increase patient adherence and optimise health outcomes. While the aim of patient-centred care is to find common ground, health practitioners tend to drive the encounter, often interrupting patients within the first minute of the clinical conversation. Optimal care for people with chronic illnesses requires individuals to interact with health practitioners regarding their health concerns, but given these constraints, we know little about how patients strategise conversations with their care providers. This understanding may further our efforts to educate health practitioners and trainees to learn and practice patient-centred care. METHODS A constructivist grounded theory approach with iterative data collection and analysis was used to explore the processes patients use to present and shape their stories for interactions with health practitioners. Twenty-one patients (n = 16 female; 5 male) representing a variety of chronic illnesses participated in semi-structured interviews. Using the constant comparative method of analysis, salient themes were ascertained. RESULTS Patients engage in extensive strategic preparations for productive health encounters. From the data, we identified four related elements comprising patients' process of planning, preparing, and strategising for health encounters: deciding to go, organising to get airtime, rehearsing a game plan, and anticipating external forces. By focusing on the extensive preparatory work patients engage in, our study expands the dimensions of how we understand illness-related work. Assembling personal health information, gathering disease information and achieving equanimity represent the dimensions of this 'health interaction work'. CONCLUSION The work patients engage in for health encounters is noteworthy yet often invisible. And work that is unseen may also be undervalued. Acknowledging, illuminating and valuing patients' preparatory work for health encounters add to how we understand patient-centred care, and this offers new targets for us to effectively teach and deliver it.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wilma J Koopman
- Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Western University, London, ON, Canada
- London Health Sciences Centre, London, ON, Canada
| | - Kori A LaDonna
- Department of Innovation in Medical Education, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Elizabeth Anne Kinsella
- Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Western University, London, ON, Canada
- Centre for Education Research & Innovation, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Institute of Health Sciences Education, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Shannon L Venance
- Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada
| | - Christopher J Watling
- Centre for Education Research & Innovation, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Ting YY, Reid JL, Treloar E, Lee WSB, Tee JY, Cong WJP, Peng D, Edwards S, Ey J, Edwardes N, Granchi N, Maddern GJ. The doctor will see you now: eye gaze, conversation and patient engagement in the surgical outpatient clinic. An Australian observational cross-sectional study. ANZ J Surg 2021; 91:2376-2381. [PMID: 34427041 DOI: 10.1111/ans.17163] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2021] [Revised: 08/09/2021] [Accepted: 08/10/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surgical outpatient consultations are demanding for the surgeon and patients without a definite formula for success. Various factors have been identified regarding factors that influence patient satisfaction and engagement. We aimed to examine the modern-day surgical outpatient consultation and report on these factors. METHODS An observational cross-sectional study was performed by reviewing video recordings of 182 surgical consultations by 12 surgeons at The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, South Australia, Australia. RESULTS The mean consultation time was 12.3 min, with pre-surgical consultations being the longest. There were 107 consultations for benign conditions (58%). Proportionally, the consultant spoke most (51.9% of total consultation time), followed by the patient (19.5%) and then companion (8.2%). Forty-eight (26.4%) patients brought a companion to the clinic but monopolisation of the consultation by the companion was rare. When a companion was present, there was more mutual eye gaze between the consultant and the patient. Interruptions were present in 23.6% of consultations and were associated with a significant increase of the length of the consultation. Table positioning did not seem to affect the dynamics of the outpatient consultation. CONCLUSION Companions are highly valuable for promoting patient engagement and their presence should be encouraged in surgical outpatients. Interruptions should be kept to a minimum to avoid unnecessary delays. Further studies should be conducted to investigate the effect of companions, interruptions and table positioning during a consultation on patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ying Yang Ting
- Discipline of Surgery, The University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Jessica L Reid
- Discipline of Surgery, The University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Ellie Treloar
- Discipline of Surgery, The University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Wei Shan Bobby Lee
- Discipline of Surgery, The University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Jeeng Yeeng Tee
- Discipline of Surgery, The University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Wen Jing Phoebe Cong
- Discipline of Surgery, The University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Dangyi Peng
- Monash School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Suzanne Edwards
- Adelaide Health Technology Assessment, School of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Jesse Ey
- Discipline of Surgery, The University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Nicholas Edwardes
- Discipline of Surgery, The University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Nelson Granchi
- Discipline of Surgery, The University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Guy J Maddern
- Discipline of Surgery, The University of Adelaide, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Griffioen IPM, Rietjens JAC, Melles M, Snelders D, Homs MYV, van Eijck CH, Stiggelbout AM. The bigger picture of shared decision making: A service design perspective using the care path of locally advanced pancreatic cancer as a case. Cancer Med 2021; 10:5907-5916. [PMID: 34328273 PMCID: PMC8419747 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.4145] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2021] [Revised: 06/14/2021] [Accepted: 06/29/2021] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Solutions to improve the implementation of shared decision making (SDM) in oncology often focus on the consultation, with limited effects. In this study, we used a service design perspective on the care path of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). We aimed to understand how experiences of patients, their significant others, and medical professionals over the entire care path accumulate to support their ability to participate in SDM. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS We used qualitative interviews including design research techniques with 13 patients, 13 significant others, and 11 healthcare professionals, involved in the diagnosis or treatment of LAPC. The topic list was based on the literature and an auto-ethnography of the illness trajectory by a caregiver who is also a service design researcher. We conducted a thematic content analysis to identify themes influencing the ability to participate in SDM. RESULTS We found four interconnected themes: (1) Decision making is an ongoing and unpredictable process with many decision moments, often unannounced. The unpredictability of the disease course, tumor response to treatment, and consequences of choices on the quality of life complicate decision making; (2) Division of roles, tasks, and collaboration among professionals and between professionals and patients and/or their significant others is often unclear to patients and their significant others; (3) It involves "work" for patients and their significant others to obtain and understand information; (4) In "their disease journey," patients are confronted with unexpected energy drains and energy boosts, that influence their level of empowerment to participate in SDM. CONCLUSION The service design perspective uncovered how the stage for SDM is often set outside the consultation, which might explain the limited effect currently seen of interventions focusing on consultation itself. Our findings serve as a starting point for (re)designing care paths to improve the implementation of SDM in oncology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ingeborg P M Griffioen
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - Judith A C Rietjens
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marijke Melles
- Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - Dirk Snelders
- Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - Marjolein Y V Homs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Casper H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Anne M Stiggelbout
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Anderson MP, Hyrkas EK. Patient and family perceptions of an inpatient journal. Nursing 2021; 51:62-68. [PMID: 34157005 DOI: 10.1097/01.nurse.0000754044.26660.0b] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Marguerite Peggy Anderson
- At Maine Medical Center in Portland, Me., Marguerite "Peggy" Anderson is the nursing director and Eira Kristiina Hyrkas is the director of the Center for Nursing Research and Quality Outcomes. Paul Bellfy and Paulette Gallant volunteered and contributed their time and effort to this study
| | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Forner D, Noel CW, Boland L, Pieterse AH, Borkhoff CM, Hong P. The Multifocal Approach to Sharing in Shared Decision Making: A Critical Appraisal of the MAPPIN'SDM. Med Decis Making 2021; 42:114-124. [PMID: 33966516 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x211010738] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Shared decision making integrates health care provider expertise with patient values and preferences. The MAPPIN'SDM is a recently developed measurement instrument that incorporates physician, patient, and observer perspectives during medical consultations. This review sought to critically appraise the development, sensibility, reliability, and validity of the MAPPIN'SDM and to determine in which settings it has been used. METHODS This critical appraisal was performed through a targeted review of the literature. Articles outlining the development or measurement property assessment of the MAPPIN'SDM or that used the instrument for predictor or outcome purposes were identified. RESULTS Thirteen studies were included. The MAPPIN'SDM was developed by both adapting and building on previous shared decision making measurement instruments, as well as through creation of novel items. Content validity, face validity, and item quality of the MAPPIN'SDM are adequate. Internal consistency ranged from 0.91 to 0.94 and agreement statistics from 0.41 to 0.92. The MAPPIN'SDM has been evaluated in several populations and settings, ranging from chronic disease to acute oncological settings. Limitations include high reading levels required for self-administered patient questionnaires and the small number of studies that have employed the instrument to date. CONCLUSION The MAPPIN'SDM generally shows adequate development, sensibility, reliability, and validity in preliminary testing and holds promise for shared decision making research integrating multiple perspectives. Further research is needed to develop its use in other patient populations and to assess patient understanding of complex item wording.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Forner
- Division of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.,Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Christopher W Noel
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Laura Boland
- Knowledge Translation Laboratory, Health Sciences, Western University, London, ON, Canada.,Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Arwen H Pieterse
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelia M Borkhoff
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.,Pediatric Outcomes Research Team, Department of Pediatrics and Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Research Institute, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Paul Hong
- Division of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Thomas EC, Bass SB, Siminoff LA. Beyond rationality: Expanding the practice of shared decision making in modern medicine. Soc Sci Med 2021; 277:113900. [PMID: 33838448 PMCID: PMC8119352 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113900] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Revised: 03/22/2021] [Accepted: 03/31/2021] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
The contemporary healthcare field operates according to an autonomy model of medical decision-making. This model stipulates that patients have the right to make informed choices about their care. Shared decision making (SDM) has arisen as the dominant approach for clinicians and patients to collaborate in care planning and implementation. This approach relies heavily on normative (rational) decision-making processes, and often leaves out descriptive influences that stem from personal, social, and environmental factors and explain how decisions are typically made in the real world. The lack of attention to descriptive decision-making limits SDM in many ways. A multi-level approach to expanding the practice of SDM is proposed, including tailoring the decision encounter based on patients' social, cultural, and environmental context; using relational elements strategically as part of the SDM process; and modifying incentive models to promote greater attention to descriptive impacts on decision-making. These modifications are expected to make SDM, and thus patient care, more inclusive, effective, and acceptable to diverse patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elizabeth C Thomas
- Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, College of Public Health, Temple University, 1700 N. Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19121, USA.
| | - Sarah Bauerle Bass
- Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, College of Public Health, Temple University, 1301 Cecil B. Moore Avenue, Philadelphia, PA, 19122, USA.
| | - Laura A Siminoff
- Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, College of Public Health, Temple University, 1101 W. Montgomery Avenue, Philadelphia, PA, 19122, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Forner D, Noel CW, Shuman AG, Hong P, Corsten M, Rac VE, Pieterse AH, Goldstein D. Shared Decision-making in Head and Neck Surgery: A Review. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2021; 146:839-844. [PMID: 32701131 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2020.1601] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Importance Shared decision-making is a partnership between physicians and patients whereby patient values and preferences are incorporated with the best medical evidence. Shared decision-making may reduce decisional conflict, improve value-choice congruence, and increase patient involvement. Despite potential benefit in many key areas of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, both clinical and research focuses on shared decision-making are scarce. Head and neck surgical oncology is of particular interest owing to the frequency by which preference-sensitive decisions must be made. Information used in this review was obtained between January 1 and February 1, 2020. Observations Various conceptual models have been developed in an attempt to define the concept of shared decision-making. More than 40 instruments have endeavored to measure the construct of shared decision-making. However, in head and neck surgery, few studies to date have explicitly done so. Situations of clinical equipoise, such as in the management of indeterminate thyroid nodules and in the treatment of laryngeal cancer, are frequent. In contrast, value-option incongruence may occur when patient values do not align with the most oncologically sound treatment choice, such as when the resection and reconstruction of oral cancer may leave patients with significant sequelae. Several patient decision aids have been developed to improve shared decision-making in specific clinical scenarios, for example, in considering total laryngectomy or primary chemoradiotherapy. Conclusions and Relevance Despite its potential benefit, there is a dearth of research and clinical applications of shared decision-making in head and neck surgery. Shared decision-making represents an area of substantial need in this regard, and additional efforts should be put forth.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Forner
- Division of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Christopher W Noel
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, University of Toronto and University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Andrew G Shuman
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
| | - Paul Hong
- Division of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Martin Corsten
- Division of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Valeria E Rac
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative, Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Arwen H Pieterse
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - David Goldstein
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, University of Toronto and University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Keij SM, van Duijn-Bakker N, Stiggelbout AM, Pieterse AH. What makes a patient ready for Shared Decision Making? A qualitative study. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2021; 104:571-577. [PMID: 32962880 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.08.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2020] [Revised: 06/10/2020] [Accepted: 08/20/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Shared decision making (SDM) requires an active role from patients, which might be difficult for some. We aimed to identify what patients need to be ready (i.e., well-equipped and enabled) to participate in SDM about treatment, and what patient- and decision-related characteristics may influence readiness. METHODS We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients and professionals (physicians, nurses, general practitioners, and researchers). Interviews were analyzed inductively. RESULTS We identified five elements of patient readiness: 1) understanding of and attitude towards SDM, 2) health literacy, 3) skills in communicating and claiming space, 4) self-awareness, and 5) consideration skills. We identified 10 characteristics that may influence elements of readiness: 1) age, 2) cultural background, 3) educational background, 4) close relationships, 5) mental illness, 6) emotional distress, 7) acceptance of diagnosis, 8) clinician-patient relationship, 9) decision type, and 10) time. CONCLUSIONS We identified a wide range of elements that may constitute patient readiness for SDM. Readiness might vary between and within patients. This variation may result from differences in patient- and decision-related characteristics. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Clinicians should be aware that not all patients may be ready for SDM at a given moment and may need support to enhance their readiness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sascha M Keij
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| | - Nanny van Duijn-Bakker
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| | - Anne M Stiggelbout
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| | - Arwen H Pieterse
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Dorough A, Forfang D, Mold JW, Kshirsagar AV, DeWalt DA, Flythe JE. A Person-Centered Interdisciplinary Plan-of-Care Program for Dialysis: Implementation and Preliminary Testing. Kidney Med 2021; 3:193-205.e1. [PMID: 33851115 PMCID: PMC8039412 DOI: 10.1016/j.xkme.2020.11.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE Despite growing interest in individualizing care, routine dialysis processes, including the interdisciplinary plan of care, often fail to account for patient-identified priorities. To better align dialysis care with patient priorities and improve care planning experiences, we implemented a person-centered care plan program at a single clinic. We also sought to gain insight into key implementation considerations and areas for program improvement. STUDY DESIGN 6-month quality improvement project with research substudy. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS 49 hemodialysis patients and 14 care team members at a North Carolina dialysis clinic. QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES Implementation of My Dialysis Plan, a person-centered care plan program. OUTCOMES Participant perspectives and care plan meeting characteristics (quality improvement); pre- to postprogram change in patient-reported autonomy support, patient-centeredness of care, and dialysis care individualization (research). ANALYTICAL APPROACH We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to guide implementation and evaluation. We conducted pre-, intra-, and post-project interviews with clinic stakeholders (patients, clinic personnel, and medical providers) to identify implementation barriers, facilitators, and perceptions. We compared pre- and post-project care plan meeting content and patient-reported outcome survey scores. RESULTS We conducted 54 care plans with 49 patients. Overall, care teams successfully used My Dialysis Plan to elicit and link patient priorities to actionable aspects of dialysis care. Participants identified interdisciplinary team commitment, accountability, and the structured yet flexible meeting approach as key implementation elements. Throughout the project, stakeholder input guided program modifications (eg, implementation practices and resources) to better meet clinic needs, but follow-up on care plan-identified action items remained challenging. Among the 28 substudy participants, there was no difference in pre- to post-project patient-reported outcome survey scores. LIMITATIONS Single clinic implementation. CONCLUSIONS My Dialysis Plan has the potential to enhance dialysis care individualization and care plan experiences. Evaluation of program impact on patient-reported and clinical outcomes is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adeline Dorough
- University of North Carolina, (UNC) Kidney Center, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC
| | | | | | - Abhijit V. Kshirsagar
- University of North Carolina, (UNC) Kidney Center, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Darren A. DeWalt
- Division of General Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Jennifer E. Flythe
- University of North Carolina, (UNC) Kidney Center, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC
- Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Gregersen TA, Birkelund R, Wolderslund M, Steffensen KD, Ammentorp J. When life gives you no choice: Context of decision-making when offered an oncology clinical trial. Scand J Caring Sci 2021; 36:81-89. [PMID: 33606286 DOI: 10.1111/scs.12965] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2019] [Revised: 10/14/2020] [Accepted: 01/20/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with advanced cancer are faced with a wide variety of challenges and difficult treatment decisions made while in a vulnerable life-threatening situation, including decisions about clinical trial participation. Internationally, there is a great focus on shared decision-making as a way to help patients and healthcare professionals to make informed decisions together; nevertheless, research focusing on patient experiences shows that information about clinical trials is insufficient in supporting patients to make trial decisions in the context of their course of disease and managing life with advanced cancer. AIM To explore where and how decisions about participation in oncology clinical trials are made and the role of the patients and healthcare professionals. METHODS Participant observation was used as a qualitative research method to gain knowledge about decision-making in different clinical situations. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS Four themes were developed: (a) preformed decisions, (b) dissimilar perceptions of successful treatment, (c) cues and concerns stated by patients and (d) creating common ground. CONCLUSION There are underexposed aspects to be aware of in the decision-making process for clinical trial participation. Preformed decisions made by the physicians before the encounter with patients seemed to narrow down the patients' options and could have benefited from including the patients' views. Cues and concerns stated by patients were often neglected. However, when physicians talked with the patients about truly difficult issues such as treatment expectations, hope and death, it led to another kind of conversation about treatment decisions involving the patients' preferences. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Awareness of preformed decisions and an increased focus on picking up cues and concerns about existential issues in the clinical encounter may improve the quality of the decisions and increase shared decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Trine A Gregersen
- Department of Oncology, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark.,Health Services Research Unit, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark.,Department of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Regner Birkelund
- Health Services Research Unit, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark.,Department of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Maiken Wolderslund
- Health Services Research Unit, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark.,Department of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Karina Dahl Steffensen
- Department of Oncology, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark.,Department of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.,Center for Shared Decision Making, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark
| | - Jette Ammentorp
- Health Services Research Unit, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark.,Department of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Amidi Naeini A, Ranjbar H, Mohammadsadeghi H, Alavi K, Ahmadkhaniha H, Rasoulian M. Assessment of psychiatrists' approaches regarding disclosure of psychiatric disorders to their patients: a qualitative study. Med J Islam Repub Iran 2020; 34:82. [PMID: 33306057 PMCID: PMC7711037 DOI: 10.34171/mjiri.34.82] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Diagnosis disclosure is the result of a shift in medical approaches from traditional paternalism to participatory and patient-centered decision making. Disclosure of psychiatric diagnosis remained uncommon and controversial. Giving information about psychiatric illnesses is very complicated, and it is affected by several factors. While clinical guidelines provide a clear pathway for treating patients, in practice, the treatment of patients is influenced by cultural and social factors. The aim of the current study was a qualitative assessment of psychiatrists’ approaches regarding the disclosure of psychiatric disorders to their patients.
Methods: The current study was conducted with a qualitative approach. The participants were purposefully selected psychiatrists from three medical universities in Tehran, Iran. The data gathered using the semi-structured interview method. Sixteen interviews with 14 psychiatrists were conducted. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.
Results: Psychiatrists decide to disclose the diagnosis based on several factors. We summarized these factors in a central theme, passive situational decision making based on paternalism and displacement of responsibility. It has two subthemes, including "passive and situational decision making" and "paternalism and displacement of responsibility." Each theme presented by detailed quotations.
Conclusion: The results of this study showed that psychiatrists did not actively disclose the diagnosis name to patients. Diagnosis disclosure was influenced by several factors, such as the certainty about the diagnosis and the severity of the disease. This passive approach does not respect the patient's rights. The paternalistic nature of this approach mandates psychiatrists to consider themselves as the responsible perosn for their patients’ welfare.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Hadi Ranjbar
- Mental Health Research Center, Psychosocial Health Research Institute, Iran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran
| | - Homa Mohammadsadeghi
- Mental Health Research Center, Psychosocial Health Research Institute, Iran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran
| | - Kaveh Alavi
- Mental Health Research Center, Psychosocial Health Research Institute, Iran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran
| | - Hamidreza Ahmadkhaniha
- Mental Health Research Center, Psychosocial Health Research Institute, Iran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran
| | - Maryam Rasoulian
- Mental Health Research Center, Psychosocial Health Research Institute, Iran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Eide KT, Bærøe K. How to reach trustworthy decisions for caesarean sections on maternal request: a call for beneficial power. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2020; 47:medethics-2020-106071. [PMID: 33055135 PMCID: PMC8639926 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106071] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2020] [Revised: 08/12/2020] [Accepted: 08/22/2020] [Indexed: 05/08/2023]
Abstract
Caesarean delivery is a common and life-saving intervention. However, it involves an overall increased risk for short-term and long-term complications for both mother and child compared with vaginal delivery. From a medical point of view, healthcare professionals should, therefore, not recommend caesarean sections without any anticipated medical benefit. Consequently, caesarean sections requested by women for maternal reasons can cause conflict between professional recommendations and maternal autonomy. How can we assure ethically justified decisions in the case of caesarean sections on maternal request in healthcare systems that also respect patients' autonomy and aspire for shared decisions? In the maternal-professional relationship, which can be characterised in terms of reciprocal obligations and rights, women may not be entitled to demand a C-section. Nevertheless, women have a right to respect for their deliberative capacity in the decision-making process. How should we deal with a situation of non-agreement between a woman and healthcare professional when the woman requests a caesarean section in the absence of obvious medical indications? In this paper, we illustrate how the maternal-professional relationship is embedded in a nexus of power, trust and risk that reinforces a structural inferiority for women. To accommodate for beneficial use of power, these decision processes need to be trustworthy. We propose a framework, inspired by Lukes' three-dimensional notion of power, which serves to facilitate trust and allows for beneficial power in shared processes of decision-making about the delivery mode for women requesting planned C-sections.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristiane T Eide
- Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Hordaland, Norway
| | - Kristine Bærøe
- Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Hordaland, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Hoefel L, O’Connor AM, Lewis KB, Boland L, Sikora L, Hu J, Stacey D. 20th Anniversary Update of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework Part 1: A Systematic Review of the Decisional Needs of People Making Health or Social Decisions. Med Decis Making 2020; 40:555-581. [DOI: 10.1177/0272989x20936209] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Background. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) has been used for 20 years to assess and address people’s decisional needs. The evidence regarding ODSF decisional needs has not been synthesized. Objectives. To synthesize evidence from ODSF-based decisional needs studies, identify new decisional needs, and validate current ODSF decisional needs. Methods. A mixed-studies systematic review. Nine electronic databases were searched. Inclusion criteria: studies of people’s decisional needs when making health or social decisions for themselves, a child, or a mentally incapable person, as reported by themselves, families, or practitioners. Two independent authors screened eligibility, extracted data, and quality appraised studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data were analyzed using narrative synthesis. Results. Of 4532 citations, 45 studies from 7 countries were eligible. People’s needs for 101 unique decisions (85 health, 16 social) were reported by 2857 patient decision makers ( n = 36 studies), 92 parent decision makers ( n = 6), 81 family members ( n = 5), and 523 practitioners ( n = 21). Current ODSF decisional needs were reported in 2 to 40 studies. For 6 decisional needs, there were 11 new (manifestations): 1) information (overload, inadequacy regarding others’ experiences with options), 2) difficult decisional roles (practitioner, family involvement, or deliberations), 3) unrealistic expectations (difficulty believing outcome probabilities apply to them), 4) personal needs (religion/spirituality), 5) difficult decision timing (unpredictable), and 6) unreceptive decisional stage (difficulty accepting condition/need for treatment, powerful emotions limiting information processing, lacking motivation to consider delayed/unpredictable decisions). Limitations. Possible publication bias (only peer-reviewed journals included). Possible missed needs (non-ODSF studies, patient decision aid development studies, 3 ODSF needs added in 2006). Conclusion. We validated current decisional needs, identified 11 new manifestations of 6 decisional needs, and recommended ODSF revisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren Hoefel
- School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | | | | | - Laura Boland
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- School of Health Studies, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lindsey Sikora
- Health Sciences Library, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jiale Hu
- School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Dawn Stacey
- School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Holdsworth LM, Zionts D, Asch SM, Winget M. "Along for the Ride": A Qualitative Study Exploring Patient and Caregiver Perceptions of Decision Making in Cancer Care. MDM Policy Pract 2020; 5:2381468320933576. [PMID: 32587894 PMCID: PMC7294494 DOI: 10.1177/2381468320933576] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2019] [Accepted: 05/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background. Shared decision making is a cornerstone of an informed consent process for cancer treatment, yet there are often many physician and patient-related barriers to participation in the process. Decisions in cancer care are often perceived as relating to a discrete, treatment decision event, yet there is evidence that decisions are longitudinal in nature and reflect a multifactorial experience. Objective. To explore patient and caregiver perceptions of the choices and decision-making opportunities within cancer care. Design. Qualitative in-depth interviews with 37 cancer patients and 7 caregivers carried out as part of an evaluation of a cancer center’s effort to improve patient experience. Results. Participants described decision making related to four distinct phases in complex cancer care, with physicians leading, and often limiting, decisions related to disease assessment and treatment options and access, and patients leading decisions related to physician selection. Though physicians led many decisions, patients had a moderating influence on treatment, such that if patients did not like options presented, they would reconsider their options and sometimes switch physicians. Patients had various strategies for dealing with uncertainty when faced with decisions, such as seeking additional information to make an informed choice or making a conscious choice to defer decision making to the physician. Limitations. Patients were sampled from one academic cancer center that serves a predominantly Caucasian, Asian, and Hispanic/Latino population and received complex treatment. Conclusion. Because of the complexity of cancer treatment, many patients felt as though they were a “passenger” in decision making about care and did not lead many of the decisions, though many patients trusted their doctors to make the best decisions and were comforted by their expertise.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura M Holdsworth
- Division of Primary Care and Population Health, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| | - Dani Zionts
- Division of Primary Care and Population Health, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| | - Steven M Asch
- Division of Primary Care and Population Health, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| | - Marcy Winget
- Division of Primary Care and Population Health, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
After encounters: revealing patients’ unseen work through their pathways to care. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MIGRATION HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE 2020. [DOI: 10.1108/ijmhsc-07-2019-0066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Purpose
Research has long focused on the notion of access and the trajectory towards a healthcare encounter but has neglected what happens to patients after these initial encounters. This paper focuses attention on what happens after an initial healthcare encounter leading to a more nuanced understanding of how patients from a diverse range of backgrounds make sense of medical advice, how they mix this knowledge with other forms of information and how they make decisions about what to do next.
Design/methodology/approach
Drawing on 160 in-depth interviews across four European countries the paper problematizes the notion of access; expands the definition of “decision partners”; and reframes the medical encounter as a journey, where one encounter leads to and informs the next.
Findings
This approach reveals the significant unseen, unrecognised and unacknowledged work that patients undertake to solve their health concerns.
Originality/value
De-centring the professional from the healthcare encounter allows us to understand why patients take particular pathways to care and how resources might be more appropriately leveraged to support both patients and professionals along this journey.
Collapse
|
44
|
A standardized patient education class as a vehicle to improving shared decision-making and increasing access to breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2020; 73:1534-1539. [PMID: 32241738 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2020.02.032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2019] [Revised: 12/25/2019] [Accepted: 02/11/2020] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Shared decision-making is a key component of patient-centered care and has been shown to improve patient satisfaction and quality of life. Herein, we study the impact of a standardized patient education class for prospective breast reconstruction patients on clinic efficiency, access to care, and perception on shared decision-making. METHODS The number of new patient consultations per clinic, as well as average duration of the first individual clinic encounter, was compared before and after the introduction of a standardized education class given by the senior author to all new breast reconstruction patients. To evaluate patients' perception of shared decision-making, the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q9) and the Satisfaction with Information scale of the BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module were electronically distributed among the patients and compared between the two groups. RESULTS Introduction of the patient education class was associated with a significant reduction in the duration of new patient encounters compared to historic controls (31.8 min vs. 53.5 min, p < 0.01) along with permitting a 43% increase in new patient visits. No differences in self-perceived patient education and autonomy were seen between class participants and historic controls in the SDM-Q9 scores (p = 0.58) and BREAST-Q scores (p = 0.14). CONCLUSION The introducing a standardized patient education class translated into a significant reduction in the duration of individual new patient encounters, thereby increasing patient access to care, while maintaining high-quality standards of self-perceived patient education and shared decision-making.
Collapse
|
45
|
Bomhof-Roordink H, Gärtner FR, van Duijn-Bakker N, van der Weijden T, Stiggelbout AM, Pieterse AH. Measuring shared decision making in oncology: Development and first testing of the iSHAREpatient and iSHAREphysician questionnaires. Health Expect 2020; 23:496-508. [PMID: 32022350 PMCID: PMC7104639 DOI: 10.1111/hex.13015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2019] [Revised: 11/21/2019] [Accepted: 12/07/2019] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Existing measures to assess shared decision making (SDM) have often been developed based on an ill-defined underlying construct, and many assess physician behaviours only or focus on a single patient-physician encounter. OBJECTIVE To (a) develop a patient and a physician questionnaire to measure SDM in oncology and (b) determine their content validity and comprehensibility. METHODS A systematic review of SDM models and an oncology-specific SDM model informed the domains of the SDM construct. We formulated items for each SDM domain. Cancer patients and physicians rated content validity in an online questionnaire. We assumed a formative measurement model and performed online field-testing in cancer patients to inform further item reduction. We tested item comprehension in cognitive interviews with cancer patients and physicians. RESULTS We identified 17 domains and formulated 132 items. Twelve cancer patients rated content validity at item level, and 11 physicians rated content validity at domain level. We field-tested the items among 131 cancer patients and conducted cognitive interviews with eight patients and five physicians. These phases resulted in the 15-item iSHAREpatient and 15-item iSHAREphysician questionnaires, covering 13 domains. CONCLUSIONS We thoroughly developed the iSHARE questionnaires. They both assess patient and physician behaviours and cover the entire SDM process rather than a single consultation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hanna Bomhof-Roordink
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Fania R Gärtner
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Nanny van Duijn-Bakker
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Trudy van der Weijden
- Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI School for Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Anne M Stiggelbout
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Arwen H Pieterse
- Medical Decision Making, Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To (1) provide an up-to-date overview of shared decision making (SDM)-models, (2) give insight in the prominence of components present in SDM-models, (3) describe who is identified as responsible within the components (patient, healthcare professional, both, none), (4) show the occurrence of SDM-components over time, and (5) present an SDM-map to identify SDM-components seen as key, per healthcare setting. DESIGN Systematic review. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Peer-reviewed articles in English presenting a new or adapted model of SDM. INFORMATION SOURCES Academic Search Premier, Cochrane, Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science were systematically searched for articles published up to and including September 2, 2019. RESULTS Forty articles were included, each describing a unique SDM-model. Twelve models were generic, the others were specific to a healthcare setting. Fourteen were based on empirical data, 26 primarily on analytical thinking. Fifty-three different elements were identified and clustered into 24 components. Overall, Describe treatment options was the most prominent component across models. Components present in >50% of models were: Make the decision (75%), Patient preferences (65%), Tailor information (65%), Deliberate (58%), Create choice awareness (55%), and Learn about the patient (53%). In the majority of the models (27/40), both healthcare professional and patient were identified as actors. Over time, Describe treatment options and Make the decision are the two components which are present in most models in any time period. Create choice awareness stood out for being present in a markedly larger proportion of models over time. CONCLUSIONS This review provides an up-to-date overview of SDM-models, showing that SDM-models quite consistently share some components but that a unified view on what SDM is, is still lacking. Clarity about what SDM constitutes is essential though for implementation, assessment, and research purposes. A map is offered to identify SDM-components seen as key. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO registration CRD42015019740.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Fania R Gärtner
- Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Anne M Stiggelbout
- Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Arwen H Pieterse
- Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Drivenes K, Haaland VØ, Mesel T, Tanum L. Practitioners' positive attitudes promote shared decision-making in mental health care. J Eval Clin Pract 2019; 25:1041-1049. [PMID: 31508872 DOI: 10.1111/jep.13275] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2019] [Revised: 07/05/2019] [Accepted: 08/21/2019] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND AIMS There is a growing expectation of implementing shared decision making (SDM) in today's health care service, including mental health care. Traditional understanding of SDM may be too narrow to capture the complexity of treatments of mental health problems. Although the patients' contribution to SDM is well described, the contribution from the health care practitioners is less explored. Therefore, our aim was to explore the attitudes of practitioners in mental health care and the associations between practitioners' attitudes and SDM. METHOD We performed a cross-sectional study where practitioners reported their sharing and caring attitudes on the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale (PPOS) and age, gender, profession, and clinical working site. The patients reported SDM using the CollaboRate tool. We used a mixed effect model linking the data from each practitioner to one or more patients. We presented the findings and used them as background for a more philosophic reflection. RESULTS We included 312 practitioners with mean age 46.1 years. Of the practitioners, 60 held a medical doctors degree, 97 were psychologists, and 127 held a college degree in nursing, social science, or pedagogy. Female practitioners reported higher sharing (4.79 vs 4.67 [range 1-6], P = .04) and caring scores (4.77 vs 4.65 [range 1-6], P = .02) than males. The regression model contained 206 practitioners and 772 patients. We found a higher probability for the patient to report high SDM score if the practitioner reported higher sharing scores, and lower probability if the practitioner worked in ambulatory care. CONCLUSIONS SDM in mental health care is complex and demands multifaceted preparations from practitioners as well as patients. The practitioners' attitudes are not sufficiently explored using one instrument. The positive association between practitioners' patient-centred attitudes and SDM found in this study implies a relevance of the practitioners' attitudes for accomplishment of SDM processes in mental health care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karin Drivenes
- Division of Mental Health, Sørlandet Hospital HF, Norway.,South Eastern Norway Hospital Pharmacy Enterprise, Kristiansand, Norway.,Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Vegard Øksendal Haaland
- Division of Mental Health, Sørlandet Hospital HF, Norway.,Department of Psychology, Clinical Neuroscience Research Group, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Terje Mesel
- Division of Mental Health, Sørlandet Hospital HF, Norway.,Department of Religion Philosophy and History, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway
| | - Lars Tanum
- Research and Development Department Mental Health, Akershus University Hospital, Lorenskog, Norway.,Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Bussey LG, Sillence E. The role of internet resources in health decision-making: a qualitative study. Digit Health 2019; 5:2055207619888073. [PMID: 31741741 PMCID: PMC6843735 DOI: 10.1177/2055207619888073] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2019] [Accepted: 10/22/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective Internet resources remain important for health information and advice but their specific role in decision-making is understudied, often assumed and remains unclear. In this article, we examine the different ways in which internet resources play a role in health decision-making within the context of distributed decision-making. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with 37 people in the United Kingdom who reported using the internet in relation to decision-making, and representing a range of long- and short-term health conditions. The interviews focused on decision-making activities across different settings and in relation to different stakeholders to understand how internet resources play a role in these activities. We carried out a thematic analysis of the interviews. Results We identified three main ways in which internet resources played a role in health decision-making. A supportive role (as a decision crutch), a stimulating role (as a decision initiator), and an interactional role (impacting on the doctor–patient relationship). These three roles spanned different resources and illustrated how the decision-making process can be impacted by the encounters people have with technology – specifically internet based health resources – in different ways and at different time points. Conclusions Examining health decisions with respect to internet resources highlights the complex and distributed nature of decision-making alongside the complexity of online health information sourcing. We discuss the role of internet resources in relation to the increasing importance of online personal experiences and their relevance within shared decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren Georgia Bussey
- School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Law, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, Tees Valley, UK
| | - Elizabeth Sillence
- Psychology and Communication Technologies Lab, Department of Psychology, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Gregersen TA, Birkelund R, Wolderslund M, Netsey‐Afedo ML, Steffensen KD, Ammentorp J. What matters in clinical trial decision‐making: a systematic review of interviews exploring cancer patients’ experiences. Scand J Caring Sci 2019; 33:266-278. [DOI: 10.1111/scs.12637] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2018] [Accepted: 11/13/2018] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Trine A. Gregersen
- Department of Oncology Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle Denmark
- Health Services Research Unit Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle Denmark
- Department of Regional Health Research Faculty of Health Sciences University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark
| | - Regner Birkelund
- Health Services Research Unit Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle Denmark
- Department of Regional Health Research Faculty of Health Sciences University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark
| | - Maiken Wolderslund
- Health Services Research Unit Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle Denmark
- Department of Regional Health Research Faculty of Health Sciences University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark
| | - Mette Løwe Netsey‐Afedo
- Health Services Research Unit Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle Denmark
- Department of Regional Health Research Faculty of Health Sciences University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark
- Urological Research Center Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle Denmark
| | - Karina Dahl Steffensen
- Department of Oncology Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle Denmark
- Department of Regional Health Research Faculty of Health Sciences University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark
- Center for Shared Decision Making Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle Denmark
| | - Jette Ammentorp
- Health Services Research Unit Lillebaelt Hospital Vejle Denmark
- Department of Regional Health Research Faculty of Health Sciences University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Luig T, Elwyn G, Anderson R, Campbell-Scherer DL. Facing obesity: Adapting the collaborative deliberation model to deal with a complex long-term problem. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING 2019; 102:291-300. [PMID: 30292424 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2018.09.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2018] [Revised: 08/15/2018] [Accepted: 09/21/2018] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Care communication about obesity needs to respond to the complex biopsychosocial processes that affect weight and health. The collaborative deliberation model conceptualizes interpersonal work that underpins empathic communication and shared decision-making. The goal of this study was to elucidate how primary care practitioners can use the model to achieve shared obesity assessment and care planning. METHODS This qualitative study used direct observation of clinical encounters with twenty patients with obesity sampled for maximum variation in context, semi-structured patient and provider interviews, patient journals and two follow-up interviews over eight weeks. Themes were compared to the original model. RESULTS We identified five processes that may be relevant for collaborative deliberation about obesity in addition to the original model: (1) Exploring the story, (2) Reframing the story, (3) Co-constructing a new story, (4) Choosing a priority, and (5) Experimenting with alternatives. CONCLUSIONS We propose an enhanced collaborative deliberation model for obesity that describes the interpersonal work needed before and after deliberation about preferences and courses of action. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS The enhanced model can support clinicians in achieving meaningful conversations about obesity and complex chronic disease resulting in care plans that are responsive to and achievable in the patient's lifeworld.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thea Luig
- Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
| | - Glyn Elwyn
- The Dartmouth Center for Health Care Delivery Science, Dartmouth College, USA.
| | - Robin Anderson
- Edmonton Southside Primary Care Network, Edmonton, Canada.
| | - Denise L Campbell-Scherer
- Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada; Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Alberta Diabetes Institute, Edmonton, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|