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

Doctor interaction behavior, patient participation in value co-creation and patient satisfaction: cross-sectional survey in a tertiary-level hospital from Guangzhou, China

Value co-creation can be defined as the joint benefit that is created by patients and medical service providers through the integration of their respective resources. Participation and interaction between doctors and patients can generate an outcome that benefits both sides. Relevant studies of value co-creation in the healthcare field are limited. This study established hypotheses to explore the association between doctor interaction behavior, patient participation in value co-creation, and patient satisfaction. A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 637 patients (outpatients and inpatients) at a tertiary-level hospital in Guangzhou, China. The analysis result indicated that doctor interaction behavior could stimulate patient participation in value co-creation then increase patient satisfaction. The standardized total effect, direct effect, and indirect effect were 0.641 (95%CI: 0.055 ~ 0.067), 0.546 (95%CI: 0.044 ~ 0.059), and 0.095 (95%CI: 0.032 ~ 0.166), respectively. Patient participation in value co-creation mediated the relationship between doctor interaction behavior and patient satisfaction. Among the different dimensions of doctor interaction behavior, access, risk assessment and transparency dimensions were associated with positive patient participation in value co-creation. During the treatment process, doctor interaction and patient participation can get satisfying results.

Effectiveness of shared decision-making for glycaemic control among type 2 diabetes mellitus adult patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In diabetes care and management guidelines, shared decision-making (SDM) implementation is explicitly recommended to help patients and health care providers to make informed shared decisions that enable informed choices and the selection of treatments. Despite widespread calls for SDM to be embedded in health care, there is little evidence to support SDM in the management and care of diabetes. It is still not commonly utilized in routine care settings because its effects remain poorly understood. Hence, the current systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of SDM for glycaemic control among type 2 diabetes adult patients.

METHODS

Literature sources were searched in MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane library and HINARI bibliographic databases and Google Scholar. When these records were searched and reviewed, the PICO criteria (P: population, I: intervention, C: comparator, and O: outcome) were applied. The extracted data was exported to RevMan software version 5.4 and STATA 17 for further analysis. The mean differences (MD) of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were pooled using a random effect model (REM), and sub-group analysis were performed to evaluate the effect size differences across the duration of the follow-up period, modes of intervention, and baseline glycated hemoglobin level of patient groups. The sensitivity analysis was performed using a leave-one-out meta-analysis to quantify the impact of each study on the overall effect size in mean difference HbA1c%. Finally, the statistically significant MD of HbA1c% between the intervention groups engaged in SDM and control groups received usual care was declared at P ˂0.05, using a 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

In the database search, 425 records were retrieved, with only 17 RCT studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 5416 subjects were included, out of which 2782(51.4%) were included in trial arms receiving SDM and 2634(48.6%) were included in usual diabetes care. The Higgins (I2) test statistics were calculated to be 59.1%, P = 0.002, indicating statistically significant heterogeneity was observed among the included studies, and REM was used as a remedial to estimate the pooled MD of HbA1c% level between patients who participated in SDM and received usual care. As a result, the pooled MD showed that the SDM significantly lowered HbA1c by 0.14% compared to the usual care (95% CI = [-0.26, -0.02], P = 0.02). SDM significantly decreased the level of HbA1c by 0.14% (95% CI = -0.28, -0.01, P = 0.00) when shared decisions were made in person or face-to-face at the point of care, but there was no statistically significant reduction in HbA1c levels when patients were engaged in online SDM. In patients with poorly controlled glycaemic level (≥ 8%), SDM significantly reduced level of HbA1c by 0.13%, 95% CI = [-0.29, -0.03], P = 0.00. However, significant reduction in HbA1c was not observed in patients with ˂ 8%, HbA1c baseline level.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, statistically significant reduction of glycated hemoglobin level was observed among T2DM adult patients who participated in shared decision-making compared to those patients who received diabetes usual care that could lead to improved long-term health outcomes, reducing the risk of diabetes-related complications. Therefore, we strongly suggest that health care providers and policy-makers should integrate SDM into diabetes health care and management, and further study should focus on the level of patients' empowerment, health literacy, and standardization of decision supporting tools to evaluate the effectiveness of SDM in diabetes patients.

"I am not just a place for implementation. I should be a partner": a qualitative study of patient-centered care from the perspective of diabetic patients in Saudi Arabia

INTRODUCTION

Patient involvement in care is a major component of high quality of care and is becoming recognized worldwide with many beneficial for improving patient outcomes. However, a little is known about patient involvement in the Middle East region and Saudi Arabia in particular.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate patients' perceptions of their involvement during their interactions with healthcare providers in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

A qualitative exploratory study using semi structured interview was conducted from February 2022 to March 2022. Responses were transcribed and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

We conducted seven interviews with patients with diabetes ranging in age from 19 to 69 years old. We identified the following themes:1) patients' perceptions of their involvement in care, 2) barriers to patient involvement, 3) effective communication, 4) empathy, and 5) culture. We found that patients had minimal knowledge of patient involvement in care.

CONCLUSION

There is a clear need to improve education and awareness of patient involvement in Saudi Arabia. By educating patients about the possibilities of patient involvement and explaining their role it will make it easier for patients to understand appropriate levels of involvement. In addition, there is a need to understand the patient-centred care culture in Saudi Arabia through establishing frameworks with the focus on culture and patient-centred healthcare delivery.

Patient-related characteristics considered to affect patient involvement in shared decision making about treatment: A scoping review of the qualitative literature

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.

Patient-centered care in the Middle East and North African region: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

The need for patient centered care (PCC) and its subsequent implementation has gained policy maker attention worldwide. Despite the evidence showing the benefits and the challenges associated with practicing PCC in western countries there has been no comprehensive review of the literature on PCC practice in the Middle East and North African (MENA) region, yet there is good reason to think that the practices of PCC in these regions would be different.

OBJECTIVES

This paper summarizes the existing research on the practice of PCC in the MENA region and uses this analysis to consider the key elements of a PCC definition based on MENA cultural contexts.

METHODS

Five electronic databases were searched (EMBASE, Cochrane, Medline, CINAHL and Scopus) using the search terms: patient OR person OR client OR consumer AND centered OR centred AND care. The MENA countries included were Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Palestine, Israel, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Djibouti, Pakistan, Sudan, and Turkey. Identified papers were imported to Covidence where they were independently reviewed against the inclusion criteria by two authors. The following data were extracted for each paper: author, year, location (i.e., country), objectives, methodology, study population, and results as they related to patient centred care.

RESULT

The electronic search identified 3582 potentially relevant studies. Fifty articles met the inclusion criteria. Across all papers five themes were identified: 1) patient centered care principles; 2) patient and physician perceptions of PCC; 3) facilitators of PCC; 4) implementation and impact of PCC; and 5) barriers to PCC.

CONCLUSION

The preliminary findings suggest that the concept of PCC is practiced and supported to a limited extent in the MENA region, and that the implementation of PCC might be impacted by the cultural contexts of the region. Our review therefore highlights the importance of establishing patient-centered care definitions that clearly incorporate cultural practices in the MENA region. The elements and impact of culture in the MENA region should be investigated in future research.

Key Factors Relevant for Healthcare Decisions of Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes in Secondary Care According to Healthcare Professionals

Purpose

Understanding which factors are important for healthcare decisions of patients with diabetes in clinical practice is important to personalise diabetes care strategies and tailor care plans to the individual. The main drivers for these healthcare decisions remain unclear. This study assessed which key factors are relevant for healthcare decisions during clinical consultations for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM), according to healthcare professionals.

Materials and Methods

Annual diabetes reviews were performed as part of a trial assessing the impact of a consultation model facilitating person-centred diabetes care in six hospital outpatient clinics. After each consultation, we asked healthcare professionals to choose a maximum of three out of 20 factors that were most relevant for healthcare decisions about treatment goals and the professional support needed during the upcoming year. Factors were characterised as either person or disease-related. Percentages reflect the number of annual diabetes reviews in which the key factor was reported.

Results

Seventeen physicians and eight diabetes specialist nurses reported the key factors relevant for healthcare decisions in 285 annual diabetes reviews (T1DM n = 119, T2DM n = 166). Healthcare professionals most often reported quality of life (31.9%), motivation (27.0%) and diabetes self-management (25.6%), and to a lesser extent glycaemic control (24.2%), to be important for decisions about treatment goals. For decisions about the professional support needed during the upcoming year patient's preferences (33.7%), diabetes self-management (33.3%), quality of life (27.0%) and motivation (25.6%) were most often considered relevant by healthcare professionals.

Conclusion

According to healthcare professionals, person-related factors such as quality of life, diabetes self-management and motivation are predominantly relevant for healthcare decisions about treatment goals and the professional support needed during the upcoming year.