The strategies used by general practitioners when providing information about medicines

Shared decision-making and the nuances of clinical work: Concepts, barriers and opportunities for a dynamic model

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) is considered the "final stage" that completes the implementation of evidence-based medicine. Yet, it is also considered the most neglected stage. SDM shifts the epistemological authority of medical knowledge to one that deliberately includes patients' values and preferences. Although this redefines the work of the clinical encounter, it remains unclear what a shared decision is and how it is practiced.

AIM

The aim of this paper is to describe how healthcare professionals manoeuvre the nuances of decision-making that shape SDM. We identify barriers to SDM and collect strategies to help healthcare professionals think beyond existing solution pathways and overcome barriers to SDM.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 68 healthcare professionals from psychiatry, internal medicine, intensive care medicine, obstetrics and orthopaedics and 15 patients.

RESULTS

This study found that healthcare professionals conceptualize SDM in different ways, which indicates a lack of consensus about its meaning. We identified five barriers that limit manoeuvring space for SDM and contest the feasibility of a uniform, normative SDM model. Three identified barriers: (a) "not all patients want new role," (b) "not all patients can adopt new role," and (c) "attitude," were linked to strategies focused on the knowledge, skills and attitudes of individual healthcare professionals. However, systemic barriers: (d) "prioritization of medical issues" and (e) "lack of time" render such individual-focused strategies insufficient.

CONCLUSION

There is a need for a more nuanced understanding of SDM as a "graded" framework that allows for flexibility in decision-making styles to accommodate patient's unique preferences and needs and to expand the manoeuvring space for decision-making. The strategies in this study show how our understanding of SDM as a process of multi-dyadic interactions that spatially exceed the consulting room offers new avenues to make SDM workable in contemporary medicine.

Issues potentially affecting quality of life arising from long-term medicines use: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy is increasing and managing large number of medicines may create a burden for patients. Many patients have negative views of medicines and their use can adversely affect quality of life. No studies have specifically explored the impact of general long-term medicines use on quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the issues which patients taking long-term medicines consider affect their day-to-day lives, including quality of life.

SETTING

Four primary care general practices in North West England.

METHODS

Face-to-face interviews with adults living at home, prescribed four or more regular medicines for at least 1 year. Interviewees were identified from primary care medical records and purposively selected to ensure different types of medicines use. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Twenty-one interviews were conducted and analysed. Patients used an average of 7.8 medicines, 51 % were preventive, 40 % for symptom relief and 9 % treatment. Eight themes emerged: relationships with health professionals, practicalities, information, efficacy, side effects, attitudes, impact and control. Ability to discuss medicines with health professionals varied and many views were coloured by negative experiences, mainly with doctors. All interviewees had developed routines for using multiple medicines, some requiring considerable effort. Few felt able to exert control over medicines routines specified by health professionals. Over half sought additional information about medicines whereas others avoided this, trusting in doctors to guide their medicines use. Patients recognised their inability to assess efficacy for many medicines, notably those used for prophylaxis. All were concerned about possible side effects and some had poor experiences of discussing concerns with doctors. Medicines led to restrictions on social activities and personal life to the extent that, for some, life can revolve around medicines.

CONCLUSION

There is a multiplicity and complexity of issues surrounding medicines use, which impact on day-to-day lives for patients with long-term conditions. While most patients adapt to long-term medicines use, others did so at some cost to their quality of life.

Structural equation modeling of the proximal-distal continuum of adherence drivers

OBJECTIVES

Nonadherence to prescription medications has been shown to be significantly influenced by three key medication-specific beliefs: patients' perceived need for the prescribed medication, their concerns about the prescribed medication, and perceived medication affordability. Structural equation modeling was used to test the predictors of these three proximal determinants of medication adherence using the proximal-distal continuum of adherence drivers as the organizing conceptual framework.

METHODS

In Spring 2008, survey participants were selected from the Harris Interactive Chronic Illness Panel, an internet-based panel of hundreds of thousands of adults with chronic disease. Respondents were eligible for the survey if they were aged 40 years and older, resided in the US, and reported having at least one of six chronic diseases: asthma, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, osteoporosis, or other cardiovascular disease. A final sample size of 1072 was achieved. The proximal medication beliefs were measured by three multi-item scales: perceived need for medications, perceived medication concerns, and perceived medication affordability. The intermediate sociomedical beliefs and skills included four multi-item scales: perceived disease severity, knowledge about the prescribed medication, perceived immunity to side effects, and perceived value of nutraceuticals. Generic health beliefs and skills consisted of patient engagement in their care, health information-seeking tendencies, internal health locus of control, a single-item measure of self-rated health, and general mental health. Structural equation modeling was used to model proximal-distal continuum of adherence drivers.

RESULTS

The average age was 58 years (range = 40-90 years), and 65% were female and 89% were white. Forty-one percent had at least a four-year college education, and just under half (45%) had an annual income of $50,000 or more. Hypertension and hyperlipidemia were each reported by about a quarter of respondents (24% and 23%, respectively). A smaller percentage of respondents had osteoporosis (17%), diabetes (15%), asthma (13%), or other cardiovascular disease (8%). Three independent variables were significantly associated with the three proximal adherence drivers: perceived disease severity, knowledge about the medication, and perceived value of nutraceuticals. Both perceived immunity to side effects and patient engagement was significantly associated with perceived need for medications and perceived medication concerns.

CONCLUSION

Testing the proximal-distal continuum of adherence drivers shed light on specific areas where adherence dialogue and enhancement should focus. Our results can help to inform the design of future adherence interventions as well as the content of patient education materials and adherence reminder letters. For long-term medication adherence, patients need to autonomously and intrinsically commit to therapy and that, in turn, is more likely to occur if they are both informed (disease and medication knowledge and rationale, disease severity, consequences of nonadherence, and side effects) and motivated (engaged in their care, perceive a need for medication, and believe the benefits outweigh the risks).

Technogovernance: Evidence, subjectivity, and the clinical encounter in primary care medicine

Technological solutions to problems of knowledge and practice in health care are routinely advocated. This paper explores the ways that new systems of practice are being deployed as intermediaries in interactions between clinicians and their patients. Central to this analysis is the apparent conflict between two important ways of organizing ideas about practice in primary care. First, a shift away from the medical objectification of the patient, towards patient-centred clinical practice in which patients'heterogeneous experiences and narratives of ill-health are qualitatively engaged and enrolled in decisions about the management of illness trajectories. Second the mobilization of evidence about large populations of experimental subjects revealed through an impetus towards evidence-based medicine, in which quantitative knowledge is engaged and enrolled to guide the management of illness, and is mediated through clinical guidelines. The tension between these two ways of organizing ideas about clinical practice is a strong one, but both impulses are embodied in new 'technological' solutions to the management of heterogeneity in the clinical encounter. Technological solutions themselves, we argue, embody and enact these tensions, but may also be opening up a new array of practices--technogovernance--in which the heterogeneous narratives of the patient-centred encounter can be resituated and guided.

Why organizations continue to create patient information leaflets with readability and usability problems: an exploratory study

Readability and usability problems with patient information leaflets continue to be reported despite long-standing recognition of their existence and the availability of guidelines for developing health education materials. This exploratory study examined possible causes for such problems, based on interviews with professionals who developed leaflets in large health organizations. Findings suggest that readability is an important concern for developers, but that complex organizational processes are involved in creating leaflets, and that developers face a need to cope with organizational politics, goal conflicts and various other pressures. Six factors were identified, i.e. (1) initiators, (2) intended users and contexts of use, (3) goals, (4) work flow and content decisions, (5) readability considerations, and (6) evaluation practices, that can adversely affect the content, organization, and resulting comprehensibility and usability of leaflets. It is suggested to adopt a broad ecological view of the environments in which patient education materials are created and deployed. Implications for practice and for future related research are discussed.

We are the experts: people with asthma talk about their medicine information needs

People with chronic illness are being encouraged to become more involved in their care. For this, they need to be well informed about their medicines, and more written medicines information is becoming available. However, there is little data about its effectiveness and impact. This study examined the patient perspective of medicines information through focus groups of people with asthma. Most participants actively sought medicines information from a variety of professional and lay sources. There were some positive experiences but many examples of partial or total information failure. Individualised information was valued and medicine leaflets were generally seen as less helpful than face-to-face advice. Some felt strongly that patients with long experience should be involved in the development of medicine information leaflets. We conclude that medicine information leaflets do not currently meet the needs of users and that people who take medicines should be involved in their development and testing.