Shared decision making in Taiwan

Experiences and perspectives related to shared decision-making among outpatients with degenerative joint disease in Taiwan: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Various treatment options are available for degenerative joint disease (DJD). During clinical visits, patients and clinicians collaboratively make decisions regarding the optimal treatment for DJD; this is the essence of shared decision-making (SDM). Here, we collated and assessed the SDM-related experiences and perspectives of outpatients with DJD in Taiwan.

DESIGN

In-depth interviews and thematic analysis.

SETTING

Primary care clinics of a regional teaching hospital in Taiwan, October 2021-May 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

21 outpatients with at least three visits for DJD and who were aware of SDM.

RESULTS

Four main themes emerged in this study: first, equipping themselves with knowledge: outpatients obtained disease-related and treatment-related knowledge in various ways-seeking relevant information online, discussing with family and friends, learning from their own experiences or learning from professionals. Second, shared or not shared: physicians had different patterns for communicating with patients, particularly when demonstrating authority, performing mutual discussion, respecting patient preferences or responding perfunctorily. Third, seldom saying no to physician-prescribed treatment plans during clinical visits: most patients respected physicians' professionalism; however, some patients rejected physicians' recommendations indirectly, whereas some responded depending on their disease prognosis. Fourth, whose call?-participants decided to accept or reject a treatment plan independently or by discussing it with their families or by obeying their physicians' recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, patients with DJD sought reliable medical information from various sources before visiting doctors; however, when having a conversation with patients, physicians dominated the discussion on treatment options. The patient-physician interaction dynamics during the SDM process determined the final medical decision, which was in accordance with either patients' original autonomy or physicians' recommendations. To alleviate medical paternalism and physician dominance, patients should be empowered to engage in medical decision-making and share their opinions or concerns with their physicians. Family members should also be included in SDM.

Characteristics of Life-Sustaining Treatment Decisions: National Data Analysis in South Korea

This study analyzed the national data on life-sustaining treatment decisions from 2018 to 2020 to find out the characteristics of South Korea's end-of-life procedure according to the decision-making approach and process. We collected the data of 84,422 patients registered with the National Agency for Management of Life-sustaining Treatment. We divided the patients into four groups (G1, G2, G3, and G4) according to the decision-making approach. A descriptive analysis of each group was conducted using indicators such as the patient's age, status, diagnosis, and content of forgoing life-sustaining treatment. Additionally, logistic regression analysis was performed by dividing the patients into self-determining (G1, G2) and non-self-determining patients (G3, G4). Cancer was the most common diagnosis for each group. The period from life-sustaining treatment decision to implementation was 10.76, 1.01, 0.86, and 1.19 days for G1, G2, G3, and G4, respectively. In the logistic regression analysis, the self-determination ratio was higher for 40-49 years old and lower for cardiovascular disease and gastrointestinal disease. Age was has a major impact on life-sustaining treatment decisions (LSTD), and with increase in age, the family, and not the patient, made the LSTD. The LSTD method also differed depending on the disease. The self-determination rates of patients with circulatory or digestive diseases were somewhat lower than that of those with neoplastic diseases. The period from decision-making to implementation is short for end-of-life care.

Assessing the impact of patient-involvement healthcare strategies on patients, providers, and the healthcare system: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient involvement has become an important and lively field of research, yet existing findings are fragmented and often contested. Without a synthesis of the research field, these findings are of limited use to scholars, healthcare providers, or policy-makers.

OBJECTIVE

Examine the body of knowledge on patient involvement to determine what is known, contested, and unknown about benefits, risks, and effective implementation strategies.

PATIENT INVOLVEMENT

Patients were not involved.

METHODS

Systematic literature review of 99 journal articles using a conceptual model integrating three levels: health systems, health providers, and patients. We extracted individual research findings and organized them into the structure of our model to provide a holistic picture of patient involvement.

RESULTS

The review highlights overlaps and conflicts between various patient involvement approaches. Our results show benefits for individual patients and the health system as a whole. At the provider level, however, we identified clear barriers to patient involvement.

DISCUSSION

Patient involvement requires collaboration among health systems, healthcare providers, and patients. We showed that increasing patient responsibility and health literacy requires policy-maker interventions. This includes incentives for patient education by providers, adapting medical education curricula, and building a database of reliable health information and decision support for patients. Furthermore, policies supporting a common infrastructure for digital health data and managed patient data exchange will foster provider collaboration.

PRACTICAL VALUE

Our review shows how an approach integrating health systems, healthcare providers, and patients can make patient involvement more effective than isolated interventions. Such systematic patient involvement is likely to improve population health literacy and healthcare quality.

A retrospective study of differences in patients’ anxiety and satisfaction between paper-based and computer-based tools for “Shared Decision-Making”

We aimed to investigate differences in patients’ anxiety and satisfaction between patients undergoing paper-based patient decision aid (PDA) for shared decision-making (SDM) and those receiving computer-based PDA. We retrospectively collected questionnaires before and after SDM. Basic demographic data as well as anxiety, satisfaction, knowledge acquisition, and participation in SDM were recorded. We divided our population into subgroups according to use of paper-based or computer-based PDA. In addition, Pearson correlation analysis was applied to assess the relationships among variables. In total, 304 patients who visited our Division of Nephrology were included in the final analysis. Overall, over half of the patients felt anxiety (n = 217, 71.4%). Near half of the patients felt a reduction in anxiety after SDM (n = 143, 47.0%) and 281 patients (92.4%) were satisfied with the whole process of SDM. When we divided all the patients based on use of paper-based or computer-based PDA, the reduction of anxiety level was greater in the patients who underwent paper-based PDA when compared with that of those who underwent computer-based PDA. However, there was no significant difference in satisfaction between the two groups. Paper-based PDA was as effective as computer-based PDA. Further studies comparing different types of PDA are warranted to fill the knowledge gaps in the literature.

Determining the Development Strategy and Suited Adoption Paths for the Core Competence of Shared Decision-Making Tasks through the SAA-NRM Approach

Shared decision making (SDM) is an interactive process that involves patients and their healthcare professionals reaching joint decisions about medical care through negotiation. As the initiators of medical decision-making in daily routine, physicians should be aware of and concerned about the SDM process. Thus, professional competency development for SDM has become increasingly critical for physicians' training. Therefore, this study investigates the professional competency and the important competency development aspects/criteria of SDM tasks through expert interviews and literature research. The study adopts the SAA (satisfaction-attention analysis) method to assess the status of competency development aspects/criteria and determine the NRM (network relation map) based on the DEMATEL (decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory) technique. The results demonstrate that the CE (concept and evaluation) aspect is the dominant aspect, and the CR (communication and relationship) aspect is the aspect being dominated. The CE aspect influences the aspects of SP (skill and practice), JM (joint information and decision making) and CR, and the SP aspect affects the aspects of JM and CR. Then, the JM aspect affects the CR aspect. The study also suggests suitable adoption paths of competency development for SDM tasks using the NRM approach. It provides recommendations and strategic directions for SDM competency development and sustainable training programs.

Establishing the Competency Development and Talent Cultivation Strategies for Physician-Patient Shared Decision-Making Competency Based on the IAA-NRM Approach

Shared decision making (SDM) is a collaborative process involving patients and their healthcare workers negotiating to reach a shared decision about medical care. However, various physician stakeholders (attending physicians, medical residents, and doctors in post-graduate years) may have different viewpoints on SDM processes. The purpose of this study is to explore the core competence of physicians in performing SDM tasks and to investigate the significant competency development aspects/criteria by applying the literature research and expert interviews. We adopt the IAA (importance awareness analysis) technique for different stakeholders to evaluate the status of competency development aspects/criteria and to determine the NRM (network relation map) based on the DEMATEL (decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory) technique. The study combines the IAA and NRM methods and suggests using the IAA-NRM approach to evaluate the adoption strategies and common suitable paths for different levels of physicians. Our findings reveal that SDM perception and practice is the primary influencer of SDM competence development for all stakeholders. The current model can help hospital administrators and directors of medical education understand the diverse stakeholders’ perspectives on the core competence of SDM tasks and determine common development plans. It provides strategic directions for SDM competency development and talent cultivation programs.

Health professionals' perspectives on shared decision-making in secondary mental healthcare: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is widely recommended but has not been widely implemented in mental healthcare. There is a lack of direct evidence about health professionals' perspectives on shared decision-making in Asian cultures, particularly Taiwan. Such knowledge is of key importance to facilitate shared decision-making. Therefore, further studies are needed to clarify this issue.

AIM

To explore health professionals' perspectives of shared decision-making in secondary mental healthcare in Taiwan.

METHOD

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were used. Purposive sampling was applied to recruit health professionals. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-four health professionals were recruited. This study found the absence of shared decision-making was acceptable to them. Barriers included: powerful status of health professionals and families, patients with impaired decisional ability due to mental illness, health professionals' lack of understanding of shared decision-making, and insufficient time. Facilitators included: awareness of patients' right to autonomy and understanding of potential benefits of shared decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

The study found that the absence of patient involvement in decision-making was widely reported. A discussion of barriers and facilitators is provided. Barriers and facilitators are highlighted to build a foundation for implementing shared decision-making in the future.

Qualitative exploration of factors associated with shared decision-making in diabetes management: a health care provider's perspective

OBJECTIVE

Internationally, patient-doctor interaction has shifted from the paternalist model to the shared decision-making (SDM) model, which is an essential part of effective management of chronic illnesses, especially diabetes. It is a relatively new concept in Pakistan, and data about healthcare providers' perspectives are lacking. The aim was to explore significant facilitators and barriers to effective SDM as perceived by endocrinologists.

DESIGN

A qualitative research using in-depth interviews based on grounded theory was done. It was written in line with the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist.

SETTING

The interviews were conducted at the workplace of the endocrinologist between April and July 2019.

PARTICIPANTS

Prominent endocrinologists of Pakistan residing in Lahore were approached for in-depth interviews. The transcripts were analyzed simultaneously, and theme saturation was achieved in 11 interviews.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Thematic analysis of data done using grounded theory.

RESULTS

Four major and two minor themes were identified. The most cited barriers to effective SDM from the doctors' side were the shortage of time during consultations and the absence of formal training of clinicians in communication skills. However, the patients' hesitation in questioning the doctor, perceiving him as a paternalist 'messiah' in society and lack of education limits their ability to understand and comprehend treatment options.

CONCLUSION

There are many barriers perceived by providers as well as clients/patients by effectively using SDM. Local cultural context is influencing a lot.

Shared Decision Making and Patient-Centered Care in Israel, Jordan, and the United States: Exploratory and Comparative Survey Study of Physician Perceptions

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is a health communication model that evolved in Europe and North America and largely reflects the values and medical practices dominant in these areas.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to understand the beliefs, perceptions, and practices related to SDM and patient-centered care (PCC) of physicians in Israel, Jordan, and the United States.

METHODS

A hypothesis-generating comparative survey study was administered to physicians from Israel, Jordan, and the United States.

RESULTS

A total of 36 surveys were collected via snowball sampling (Jordan: n=15; United States: n=12; Israel: n=9). SDM was perceived as a way to inform patients and allow them to participate in their care. Barriers to implementing SDM varied based on place of origin; physicians in the United States mentioned limited time, physicians in Jordan reported that a lack of patient education limits SDM practices, and physicians in Israel reported lack of communication training. Most US physicians defined PCC as a practice for prioritizing patient preferences, whereas both Jordanian and Israeli physicians defined PCC as a holistic approach to care and to prioritizing patient needs. Barriers to implementing PCC, as seen by US physicians, were mostly centered on limited appointment time and insurance coverage. In Jordan and Israel, staff shortage and a lack of resources in the system were seen as major barriers to PCC implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The study adds to the limited, yet important, literature on SDM and PCC in areas of the world outside the United States, Canada, Australia, and Western Europe. The study suggests that perceptions of PCC might widely differ among these regions, whereas concepts of SDM might be shared. Future work should clarify these differences.

Patients' perspectives on shared decision making in secondary mental healthcare in Taiwan: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to explore patient perspectives on shared decision making in secondary mental healthcare in Taiwan.

METHODS

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were used to explore patient perspectives on shared decision making in secondary mental healthcare in Taiwan. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted from July to August 2017 with a purposive sample of twenty patients using halfway houses. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Analysis of the interviews identified two themes: barriers to shared decision making; facilitators of shared decision making. Patients perceived that they were not involved in decision making due to: the professional status of health professionals; negative perception of making decisions; and limited time resources. However, patients reported a desire to be involved and felt sufficient information exchange would be a necessary step towards collaboration/sharing decisions about treatment with clinicians.

CONCLUSION

The findings provided an understanding of significant barriers to and facilitators of implementing shared decision making to aid further professional training and the development of national policies.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The findings could be the basis for developing effective strategies to overcome barriers to shared decision making and improve the process quality of delivering shared decision making.

Perceptions of shared decision making among health care professionals

RATIONALE AND AIMS

Scholars have progressively promoted shared decision making (SDM) as an optimal model of treatment decision making in clinical practice. Nevertheless, it is unclear whether health care professionals (a) understand SDM well, (b) believe that SDM is helpful in their daily practice, and (c) are willing to practice SDM during their daily activities. These are crucial research topics; however, such research is still limited. The aim of this study was to apply the knowledge-attitude-behavior (KAB) model to probe health care professionals' perceptions of SDM.

METHODS

A questionnaire was delivered to health care professionals working in various hospitals in southern Taiwan from 9 November 2018 to 8 January 2019. In addition to KAB constructs, this study explored the barriers to SDM practice and willingness to practice SDM among health care professionals. Predictive variables were subjected to multiple linear regression analysis to investigate health care professionals' views of SDM.

RESULTS

Valid respondents numbered 400, including physicians, pharmacists, nurses, and other health care professionals. The characteristics of these health care professionals significantly affected the mean scores of the KAB model. A correlation analyses indicated that the KAB constructs were positively correlated with each other. The top three barriers reported were lack of time (57.50%), lack of knowledge (38.25%), and difficulty of developing patient decision aids (37.75%). Respondents who were willing to practice SDM opined that SDM can provide the best health care for patients (81.62%), can maintain and improve individual clinical expertise (77.38%), and can meet patient and social expectations (48.40%).

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous emphasis on education regarding SDM and continuous promotion of a positive attitude of SDM acceptance can influence the behaviour of practicing SDM among health care professionals. Further study is required to assess the SDM practices of various health care professionals in different settings.