Perceptions of shared decision making among health care professionals

Building Medication Profiles in the Elderly: a Qualitative Study Based on Medication Information Literacy in a Long-Term Care Facility

Purpose

Long-term care facilities are increasingly challenged with meeting the diverse healthcare needs of the elderly population, particularly concerning medication management. Understanding medication information literacy and behavior among this demographic is imperative. Therefore, this qualitative study aims to explore medication information literacy and develop distinct medication profiles among elderly long-term care residents.

Material and Methods

In this study, we conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 32 participants aged 65 or older residing in a long-term care facility. The interviews were designed to explore participants' understanding of medication information, medication management practices, and experiences with healthcare providers. Thematic analysis was employed to analyze the interview data, allowing for the identification of common patterns and themes related to medication-taking behavior among the elderly residents.

Results

The thematic analysis revealed four distinct medication behavior profiles among the elderly long-term care residents: (1) Proactive Health Self-Managers, (2) Medication Information Adherents, (3) Experience-Based Medication Users, and (4) Nonadherent Medication Users. These findings provide valuable insights into the diverse approaches to medication management within long-term care facilities and underscore the importance of tailored interventions to support the specific needs of each profile.

Conclusion

This study highlights the necessity for tailored medication education and support to optimize medication management for the elderly. With the aging population expansion, addressing the unique medication challenges within long-term care facilities becomes increasingly critical. This research contributes to ongoing endeavors to enhance healthcare services for the elderly, striving for safer and more effective medication-taking behavior.

Trust, discrimination and preference for shared decision-making in adolescents diagnosed with depression: Implications from Chinese mental health professionals

BACKGROUND

While evidence suggests that the attitudes of healthcare providers toward medical decision-making in adolescents diagnosed with depression merit exploration, research on their preferences for Shared Decision-Making (SDM) and the factors affecting these preferences remains limited.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate Chinese mental health professionals' (MHPs) preferences for SDM in adolescents with depression and identify the relationships between their preference for SDM and trust and discrimination.

METHODS

A cross-sectional design was used in this study. Clinical Decision-making Style-Staff (CDMS-S) was applied to evaluate their preferences for SDM. Physician Trust in the Patient Scale (PTPS) was utilised to assess their trust in consumers. Social Distance Scale to Mental Illness (SDSMI) was utilised to measure their discrimination against people with mental illness.

RESULTS

A total of 581 MHPs were identified in China. MHPs rated their preference for participation in decision making (PD) as shared (1.89 ± 0.472), information (IN) as moderate (2.62 ± 0.682), and family involvement (FI) as high (3.13 ± 0.840). The preferences for three decision topics ranked from the highest to the lowest score were working-related decision (2.35 ± 0.681), general preferences in decision (1.82 ± 0.581) and medication-related decision (1.74 ± 0.826). The mean score of PTPS and SDSMI were 34.71 (SD=9.709) and 15.17 (SD=4.299), respectively. Logistic regression indicated that the preference for PD was associated with discrimination; the preference for IN was associated with trust, discrimination and SDM-related training experience; and the preference for FI was associated with both trust and discrimination.

CONCLUSIONS

While MHPs generally exhibit a favourable attitude toward SDM, this positivity is not universally observed across all contexts. There remains room for improvement in the willingness to co-develop medication regimens and share health information. Rational recognition of depression, and building trusting and friendly therapeutic relationships are key to promoting MHPs' preferences for SDM.

PRACTICAL VALUE

MHPs' preferences for SDM have a significant impact on SDM implementation, which will be promoted by implementing SDM-related training.

Shared decision-making in palliative cancer care: A systematic review and metasynthesis

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is a key element of person-centred care and promoted as the favoured model in preference-sensitive decision-making. Limitations to implementation have been observed, and barriers and limitations, both generally and in the palliative setting, have been highlighted. More knowledge about the process of shared decision-making in palliative cancer care would assist in addressing these limitations.

AIM

To identify and synthesise qualitative data on how people with cancer, informal carers and healthcare professionals experience and perceive shared decision-making in palliative cancer care.

DESIGN

A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies. We analysed data using inductive thematic analysis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched five electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Scopus) from inception until June 2023, supplemented by backward searches.

RESULTS

We identified and included 23 studies, reported in 26 papers. Our analysis produced four analytical themes; (1) Overwhelming situation of 'no choice', (2) Processes vary depending on the timings and nature of the decisions involved, (3) Patient-physician dyad is central to decision-making, with surrounding support and (4) Level of involvement depends on interactions between individuals and systems.

CONCLUSION

Shared decision-making in palliative cancer care is a complex process of many decisions in a challenging, multifaceted and evolving situation where equipoise and choice are limited. Implications for practice: Implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice requires (1) clarifying conceptual confusion, (2) including members of the interprofessional team in the shared decision-making process and (3) adapting the approach to the ambiguous, existential situations which arise in palliative cancer care.

Influencing factors of self-management behavior in cancer patients based on a theoretical domain framework

OBJECTIVES

To explore the factors that influence self-management behavior in cancer patients based on the theoretical domain framework.

METHODS

Studies in Chinese and English about factors influencing self-management behavior in cancer patients were searched from Wanfang database, CNKI, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane library and Medline from inception to June 2022. Two investigators independently identified, extracted data, and collected characteristics and methodology of the studies. Factors were analyzed with Nvivo12, and the theoretical domain framework was mapped to the theoretical domain. Then the secondary node was generalized by theme analysis. Finally, the specific influencing factors were summarized and analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies were included for analysis. A total of 194 factors were mapped to 13 theoretical domains, and 31 secondary nodes were summarized. Theoretical domains environmental context and resources, social/professional role and identity, and beliefs about consequences were the most common factors. Knowledge, age, self-efficacy, disease stage, social support, gender, economic status and physical status were the most influential factors for self-management in cancer patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The influencing factors of self-management of cancer patients involve most of the theoretical domains, are intersectional, multi-source and complex.

Occupational low back pain prevention capacity of nurses in China: A multicenter cross-sectional study

Introduction

Nurses have a high prevalence of occupational low back pain, especially since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has increased the nurses' workloads. It has brought a huge burden on nurses and their professional development. Nurses' occupational low back pain prevention capacity is the logical starting point and core of interventions to prevent its occurrence. To date, there is no study investigating it with a scientific scale. Therefore, a multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted to explore the current status of nurses' capacity in occupational low back pain prevention and its influencing factors in China.

Methods

Using a two-stage, purposive and convenience mixed sampling method, 1331 nurses from 8 hospitals across 5 provinces (Hubei, Zhejiang, Shandong, Henan, and Sichuan) in the southern, western, northern, and central areas of mainland China were involved in this study. The demographic questionnaire and occupational low back pain prevention behavior questionnaire were used for data collection. The descriptive analysis, univariate analysis, and multiple stepwise linear regression were used for data analysis.

Results

The results showed that the occupational low back pain prevention behavior questionnaire score was 89.00 (80.00, 103.00) [M (Q1, Q3)], which indicated that nurses' ability was at a moderate level. Participation in prevention training before, perceived stress at work, and working hours per week were predictors for nurses' occupational low back pain prevention capacity.

Discussion

To improve nurses' prevention ability, nursing managers should organize various training programs, strengthen regulations to reduce nurses' workload and stress, provide a healthy workplace, and offer incentives to motivate nurses.

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.

SEE-diabetes, a patient-centered diabetes self-management education and support for older adults: Findings and information needs from providers' perspectives

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Diabetes self-management education and support (DSMES) can improve clinical and health outcomes of people with diabetes. However, DSMES has been underutilized because of many barriers. We aimed to develop a patient-centered educational aid, SEE-Diabetes (Support-Engage-Empower-Diabetes), that facilitates shared decision-making about DSMES between patient and provider during the follow-up visit. We investigated the information needs to inform the design of the SEE-Diabetes from the providers' perspective.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey (N = 42) and three focus groups (N = 13) involving providers who have experience managing diabetes in older patients. Survey collected demographics and assessed knowledge of DSMES. During the subsequent focus groups, participants evaluated the Assessment and Plan section of three clinic notes of older people with diabetes. We also demonstrated the potential workflow of DSMES documentation using SEE-Diabetes during clinical practice.

RESULTS

The survey showed 60% of providers were familiar with DSMES. Focus group findings showed clinic notes should convey concise information at an appropriate reading level, numbered problems, and less medical jargon to improve the readability of clinic notes. Application of SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound) goals was suggested to deliver effective diabetes self-care information.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers should consider adopting validated DSMES guidelines along with goal-setting strategies to provide patient-centered care. The research team will integrate the provider recommendations when we develop SEE-Diabetes.

The effectiveness of simulation education program on shared decision-making attitudes among nurses in Taiwan

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) is significantly associated with promoting the quality of end-of-life (EOL). The attitude of nurses toward the end of life can affect EOL care, but there are few SDM-related clinical learning programs focused on EOL. In this study, therefore, we evaluated the effectiveness of an EOL-simulation education program on attitudes toward SDM among nurses, using an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE).

Methods

We used a quasi-experimental study design to evaluate nurses working at a medical center in Taiwan. We recruited 100 nurses and assigned them to an experimental group (n = 50) and a control group (n = 50). The experimental group received the SDM attitude (SDMA) cultivation program, and the control group did not. After the intervention, all participants were examined in an OSCE to assess the efficacy of their learning. A p value of.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The average score of the experimental group was higher than that of the control group in the dimensions “empathic communication” and “mastery learning”, but these differences were not significant. SDMA score is significantly and positively correlated with SDMA global score, standardized patient survey (SPS) score, and SPS global score (r = .92, .56, and .50, respectively; p < .01).

Conclusions

Simulations concerning EOL care that incorporate SDM components would be effective for training clinical nurses. This study can serve as a reference for nursing-administration managers who may consider designing SDM-related education programs to improve the quality of clinical nursing care.

Translation and psychometric evaluation of the German version of the IcanSDM measure - a cross-sectional study among healthcare professionals

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) is a key component of patient-centred care. To implement SDM in clinical practice and to evaluate its effects, it is helpful to know about HCPs’ perception of SDM barriers. The measure IcanSDM was developed in Canada and assesses the perception of SDM barriers. To our knowledge, no equivalent measure exists in German. Therefore, the aim of this study was to translate and adapt the IcanSDM measure to be used by a German speaking population and evaluate its psychometric properties.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional psychometric study based on a secondary analysis of baseline data from a SDM implementation study. The original 8-item IcanSDM was translated into German using a team translation protocol. We assessed comprehensibility via cognitive interviews with n = 11 HCPs. Based on results of cognitive interviews, the translated IcanSDM version was revised. Two hundred forty-two HCPs filled out the measure. Psychometric analysis included acceptance (completion rate), item characteristics (response distribution, skewness, item difficulties, corrected item-total correlations, inter-item correlations), factorial structure (confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), model fit), and internal consistency (Cronbach’s α).

Results

We translated and adapted the German IcanSDM successfully except for item 8, which had to be revised after the cognitive interviews. Completion rate was 98%. Skewness of the items ranged between −.797 and 1.25, item difficulties ranged between 21.63 and 70.85, corrected item-total-correlations ranged between .200 and .475, inter-item correlations ranged between .005 and .412. Different models based on CFA results did not provide a valid factorial structure. Cronbach’s α ranged between .563 and .651 for different factor models.

Conclusion

We provide the first German measure for assessing perception of SDM barriers by HCPs. The German IcanSDM is a brief measure with good acceptance. However, we found unsatisfying psychometric properties, which were comparable to results of the original scale. In a next step, the IcanSDM should be further developed and modified and predictive validity should be evaluated.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06430-3.

[Not Available]

There is now broad agreement that ideas like person-centred care, patient expertise and shared decision-making are no longer peripheral to health discourse, fine ideals or merely desirable additions to sound, scientific clinical practice. Rather, their incorporation into our thinking and planning of health and social care is essential if we are to respond adequately to the problems that confront us: they need to be seen not as "ethical add-ons" but core components of any genuinely integrated, realistic and conceptually sound account of healthcare practice. This, the tenth philosophy thematic edition of the journal, presents papers conducting urgent research into the social context of scientific knowledge and the significance of viewing clinical knowledge not as something that "sits within the minds" of researchers and practitioners, but as a relational concept, the product of social interactions. It includes papers on the nature of reasoning and evidence, the on-going problems of how to 'integrate' different forms of scientific knowledge with broader, humanistic understandings of reasoning and judgement, patient and community perspectives. Discussions of the epistemological contribution of patient perspectives to the nature of care, and the crucial and still under-developed role of phenomenology in medical epistemology, are followed by a broad range of papers focussing on shared decision-making, analysing its proper meaning, its role in policy, methods for realising it and its limitations in real-world contexts.