Promoting Shared Decision-Making Behaviors During Inpatient Rounds: A Multimodal Educational Intervention

Factors influencing shared decision-making on hospital wards as perceived by healthcare professionals: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

The extent to which healthcare professionals apply Shared Decision Making (SDM) on hospital wards is still unknown. The aim was to explore the current knowledge of SDM among healthcare professionals and the experienced factors influencing SDM on the wards of Dutch hospitals, regarding both treatment and care decisions.

SETTING

Twelve hospital wards in two university medical centres and one teaching hospital.

DESIGN

Explorative qualitative design including semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals working on hospital wards.

RESULTS

23 Healthcare professionals of 12 different wards were interviewed about their knowledge and the factors influencing SDM on their hospital ward. Most healthcare professionals had heard about SDM, but their understanding of the concept of SDM differed. Influencing factors were found on three levels. Organizational factors: lack of a clear vision, various approaches of ward rounds, time, and the organizational structure. Patient-related factors: the situation of the patient, participation of relatives and perceptual differences. Healthcare professional-related factors: motivation, experience, workload, continuity of care, familiarity with the patient, interprofessional communication, tools, and education.

CONCLUSION

All healthcare professionals recognize the importance of SDM and involving the patient in healthcare decisions, because they feel it enhances the quality of care and prioritizes patient-centered care. Nevertheless, healthcare professionals frequently encounter barriers in this setting. To facilitate SDM on hospital wards in the Netherlands, it is beneficial to embed SDM in the inpatient setting and establish a clear structure for interprofessional SDM regarding both treatment and care decisions, in which physicians, nurses and patients play an essential role.

Building Frontline Capability for Shared Decision-Making (SDM) in a Major Academic Oncology Center Caring for People With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Performance Outcomes of a SDM Simulation Training Program

BACKGROUND

There is a growing body of evidence on shared decision-making (SDM) training programs worldwide. However, there is wide variation in program design, duration, effectiveness, and evaluation in both academia (ie, medical school) and the practice setting. SDM training has been slow to integrate in practice settings.

METHODS

A pilot study of 6 multidisciplinary clinicians was conducted using quantitative and qualitative methods to evaluate changes in participant understanding and implementation of SDM in the practice setting. A 2-rater criterion-based evaluation method was used to assess a simulation-based case study role-play program using 7 domains of SDM pre and post training. The authors assessed whether clinicians addressed each of the 7 domains or what fraction of each domain was addressed as part of their simulation case study role-play performance. Focus groups were conducted pre- and postintervention to provide feedback to participants and to understand the clinician experience in greater detail.

RESULTS

The increase in improvement in SDM ranged from 17% to 37%, and 7 of 8 domains for which participants were rated showed significant improvement. The areas of greatest improvement were seen in determining a patient's goals/preferences, including risk tolerance regarding treatments (+37%) and values and self-efficacy (+37%).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study reveal a significant shift in clinician awareness of a patient's goals, preferences, and values. Postintervention, clinicians began to understand the value of building a partnership with their patients whereby the patient becomes an active participant in their clinical care.

Assessing the educational quality of shared decision-making interventions for residents: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Many studies on educational interventions to enhance residents' shared decision-making (SDM) skills show limited improvement in SDM skills and clinical outcomes. One plausible explanation for these suboptimal results is the insufficient emphasis on the educational quality of training interventions.

METHODS

This review evaluates interventions' educational quality using an evaluation framework based on a previous study on effective skills transfer and a well-known SDM model. A systematic review was conducted, searching three databases until December 13, 2022. We assessed study quality by calculating MERSQI scores, examined the levels of study effects based on Kirkpatrick's model, and applied our evaluation framework to assess the interventions' educational quality. Given the heterogeneity among the studies, a meta-analysis was not feasible.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included. Role-play and feedback were common training characteristics (65% and 54% of interventions). Only four studies (15%) met our framework's high educational quality threshold. No correlation was found between MERSQI scores and educational quality.

CONCLUSIONS

This review is a valuable attempt to assess the educational quality of SDM interventions beyond measuring study outcomes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Future evaluation frameworks should consider study results, training characteristics, and training content. Our framework offers a sound basis for such an evaluation framework.

How student healthcare providers in a communication skills course respond to standardized patient resistance

Encountering and responding to patient resistance can be especially challenging for student healthcare providers. Navigating who ultimately holds the authority to know and understand a health concern, make recommendations for a course of action, and accept or resist these recommendations are all part of how epistemic authority is negotiated in medical settings. The purpose of this paper is to systematically examine how student providers enrolled in a communication skills course at an American university responded to standardized patient resistance. The data for this study were 121 video-recorded and transcribed final objective structured clinical examinations from the fall 2019 course. We used discourse analysis informed by principles of conversation analysis to identify several discursive strategies used by the students, including: 1) asking for clarification; 2) expressing uncertainty and offering to gather additional resources; 3) aligning with and offering an account for the resistance; 4) recommending a new course of action; and 5) confronting the resistance. Our findings point to the value of including instruction for both student healthcare providers and standardized patients on how to respond to resistance they encounter in ways that may help improve healthcare outcomes.

Implementation and staff understanding of shared decision-making in the context of recovery-oriented care across US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) inpatient mental healthcare units: a mixed-methods evaluation

OBJECTIVES

To examine the understanding and practice of shared decision-making (SDM) within the context of recovery-oriented care across Veterans Health Administration (VHA) inpatient mental healthcare units.

DESIGN

VHA inpatient mental health units were scored on the Recovery-Oriented Acute Inpatient Scale (RAIN). Scores on the RAIN item for medication SDM were used to rank each site from lowest to highest. The top 7 and bottom 8 sites (n=15) were selected for additional analyses using a mixed-methods approach, involving qualitative interviews, observation notes and quantitative data.

SETTING

34 VHA inpatient mental health units located in every geographical region of the USA.

PARTICIPANTS

55 treatment team members.

RESULTS

Our results identified an overarching theme of 'power-sharing' that describes participants' conceptualisation and practice of medication decision-making. Three levels of power sharing emerged from both interview and observational data: (1) No power sharing: patients are excluded from treatment decisions; (2) Limited power sharing: patients are informed of treatment decisions but have limited influence on the decision-making process; and (3) Shared-power: patients and providers work collaboratively and contribute to medication decisions. Comparing interview to observational data, only observational data indicating those themes differentiate top from bottom scoring sites on the RAIN SDM item scores. All but one top scoring sites indicated shared power medication decision processes, whereas bottom sites reflected mostly no power sharing. Additionally, our findings highlight three key factors that facilitate the implementation of SDM: inclusion of veteran in treatment teams, patient education and respect for patient autonomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of SDM appears feasible in acute inpatient mental health units. Although most participants were well informed about SDM, that knowledge did not always translate into practice, which supports the need for ongoing implementation support for SDM. Additional contextual factors underscore the value of patients' self-determination as a guiding principle for SDM, highlighting the role of a supporting, empowering and autonomy-generating environment.

Links between evidence-based medicine and shared decision-making in courses for doctors in training: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aims to synthesise the current evidence on the inclusion and effectiveness of integrating evidence-based medicine (EBM) and shared decision-making (SDM) into training courses for doctors in training to enhance patient care. Both EBM and SDM appear to be taught separately and their combined role in providing high-quality patient care has not yet been explored.

DESIGN

Scoping review of literature from January 2017 to June 2021.

SETTING

Any setting where doctors in training could undertake EBM and/or SDM courses (hospitals, universities, clinics and online).

PARTICIPANTS

Doctors in training (also known as junior doctors, residents, registrars, trainees, fellows) defined as medical graduates undertaking further training to establish a career pathway.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in the databases Medline, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library. Bibliographies of included articles and their cited references were hand searched and assessed for inclusion. Included studies described training and outcomes of either EBM, SDM or both. Reported outcomes included EBM knowledge and skill tests, attitude surveys, SDM checklists and surveys and patient and doctor experience data obtained from surveys, focus groups and interviews.

RESULTS

Of the 26 included studies, 15 described EBM training courses, 10 described SDM training courses and 1 course combined both EBM and SDM. Courses were heterogeneous in their content and outcomes, making comparisons difficult. EBM courses prioritised quantitative outcome assessments and linked knowledge and skills, such as critical appraisal, but overlooked other key elements of patient-centred care including SDM.

CONCLUSIONS

SDM and EBM are taught separately in most training courses. The inclusion of SDM, evaluated by qualitative assessments, is currently omitted, yet could provide a more person-centred care focus in EBM courses and should be investigated to increase our knowledge of the effectiveness of such courses and their role in improving doctors' skills and patient care.

PROTOCOL

A protocol for this review has been published and contains further details of the methodology.

A shared decision-making communications workshop improves internal medicine resident skill, risk-benefit education, and counseling attitude

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the impact of a workshop on first-year medicine residents (PGY1) shared decision-making (SDM) communication skill, risk-benefit education, and attitude.

METHODS

A SDM skills-focused workshop was integrated into an academic medical center PGY1 ambulatory rotation in 2016-2017. Pre/post recordings of virtual Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) with standardized patients sharing decisions were scored using OPTION5. Risk-benefit education, including decision aid use, was measured. Pre/post surveys assessed SDM practice attitudes and perceived barriers.

RESULTS

31 of 48 (65%) PGY1 workshop attendees completed pre/post OSCEs yielding 62 videos. OPTION5 scores improved from 27/100 pre to 56/100 post (p < 0.001). Pre/post increases in integration of qualitative (15/31 vs 31/31, p < 0.001) and quantitative (3/31 vs 31/31, p < 0.001) risk measures, and decision aids (1/3 vs 31/31, p < 0.001) were observed. Pro-SDM attitude of decisional neutrality increased 16.6% pre to 71.9% post-survey (P < 0.001). Barriers to SDM remain.

CONCLUSION

This PGY1 workshop with virtual OSCEs improved SDM communication skills, the ability to find and provide risk-benefit education, and SDM-facilitating attitude.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Residency programs can improve SDM skills, risk-benefit education, and attitudes with a workshop intervention. Perceived time constraints and cognitive biases regarding risk-benefit estimates should be addressed to ensure quality SDM in practice.

Impact of Pain on Postoperative Recovery and Participation in Care Following Knee Arthroplasty Surgery: A Qualitative Descriptive Study

BACKGROUND

Patient participation in care is key to optimising postsurgical outcomes and the quality of acute care delivery.

AIMS

This study explored patient perceptions of the impact of pain on acute recovery following Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA), and barriers and facilitators to participating in pain management.

DESIGN

An exploratory-descriptive qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews.

SETTINGS

A private-sector health service.

PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS

Participants were adults undergoing TKA allocated to the control ward of a cluster randomised controlled trial who received standard care.

METHODS

To allow adequate opportunity for participation in their care, interview and pain data were collected on postoperative Day 3. Acute pain was assessed using an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). Interviews were analysed using combined qualitative thematic analysis and quantitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 120 patients, 69 females (50.4%) and 68 males, were interviewed (mean age = 66.8 years, stadard deviation [SD] = 8.5). Most reported severe (NRS 7-10), day 3 pain (n = 76, 63.3%). Two themes emerged from interviews: (1) participants' postoperative pain experience; and (2) participation in postoperative pain management was limited. Pain experience was characterised by variation in pain and its qualities, having uncontrolled pain and distress, and influence from preoperative expectations. Patient participation was characterized by reliance upon prior staff instruction, barriers from limited knowledge, inconsistent promotion of non-pharmacologic strategies, and suboptimal clinician-patient communication. Regular analgesia was identified to facilitate participation.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the known benefits of patient participation in pain management, gaps remain in providing patients with the knowledge and opportunity to take an active role in their recovery. Interventions to overcome identified barriers need to be developed and evaluated.

An Annotated Bibliography of Key Studies in Medical Education in 2019: Applying the Current Literature to Educational Practice and Scholarship

Pediatric medical educators have the dual challenge of remaining up-to-date in the field of pediatrics and in the field of medical education. Due to the volume of information published in these 2 fields it can be nearly impossible to remain current in both fields of practice. To facilitate interpretation of the most recent medical education research, the authors conducted an annotated bibliography of medical education literature published in 2019. The purpose of this annotated bibliography was to identify manuscripts which had the potential to significantly influence a pediatric educator's practice. Using a 2-staged review process, the authors reviewed abstracts from 13 medical education and specialty journals. All reviews were independently completed by 2 different reviewers for each journal in both stages. A total of 4700 abstracts were reviewed and 17 key manuscripts were identified. The authors grouped the key manuscripts into 6 core themes: bedside teaching, learning climate, bias, learner autonomy, learner in trouble, and resident competency. This annotated bibliography provides the authors' condensed summary of the medical education manuscripts most likely to influence educational practices for the busy pediatric medical educator.

Shared Decision-making With Parents of Hospitalized Children: A Qualitative Analysis of Parents' and Providers' Perspectives

OBJECTIVES

Shared decision-making (SDM) is the pinnacle of patient-centered care and has been shown to improve health outcomes, especially for children with chronic medical conditions. However, parents perceive suboptimal involvement during hospitalization. The objective was to explore the perspectives of parents of hospitalized children and their hospital providers on facilitators and barriers to SDM in the hospital and identify strategies to increase SDM.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted by using semistructured interviews with parents of hospitalized children with and without complex chronic conditions and their pediatric hospital medicine faculty. Parents and faculty were matched and individually interviewed on the same day. Two investigators iteratively coded transcripts and identified themes using modified grounded theory, with an additional author reviewing themes.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven parents and 16 faculty participated in the interviews. Four themes emerged: (1) parents and providers value different components of SDM; (2) providers assume SDM is easier with parents of children with medical complexity; (3) factors related to providers, parents, patients, and family-centered rounds were identified as barriers to SDM; and (4) parents and providers identified strategies to facilitate SDM in the hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a discrepancy between parents' and providers' understanding of SDM, with parents most valuing their providers' ability to actively listen and explain the medical issue and options with them. There are many barriers that exist that make it difficult for both parties to participate. Several strategies related to family-centered rounds have been identified that can be implemented into clinical practice to mitigate these barriers.

Education makes people take their medication: myth or maxim?

Education on its own doesn't make people take their treatment as intended. However, when it follows shared decision making, in which patient and doctor together agree on the best course of therapeutic action, education helps patients take their treatment. http://bit.ly/2G2XswD.