SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Decision Making, Shared”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11Linked to original sources

PubMed2000

Hospital informed consent for procedure forms: facilitating quality patient-physician interaction.

BACKGROUND: Informed consent forms should document and reflect the goals of informed consent and shared decision making. We conducted this study to examine the extent to which informed consent for procedure forms meet accepted informed consent standards, how well state informed consent statutes correlate with these standards, and whether existing forms can enhance the interactions between patients and physicians or other health care providers. HYPOTHESIS: Informed consent forms do not meet accepted standards. A different format may be more useful for patient-physician interactions. DESIGN: A content analysis was conducted of hospital informed consent for procedure forms from a random selection of hospitals in the 1994 American Hospital Association membership directory. Forms were examined for evidence of the basic elements of informed consent (nature of the procedure, risks, benefits, and alternatives) and items that might enhance patient-physician interactions and encourage shared decision making. UNIT OF ANALYSIS: From 157 hospitals nationwide, 540 hospital informed consent for procedure forms were examined. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Ninety-six percent of forms indicated the nature of the procedure, but risks, benefits, and alternatives were found less often. Only 26% of forms included all 4 basic elements, 35% included 3 of 4 elements, 23% had 2 of 4 elements, 14% had only 1 element, and 2% had none of the elements. Forms appear to authorize treatment (75%) or protect hospitals and caregivers from liability (59%) rather than clarify information about procedures (40%) or aid patients in decision making (14%). Forms from states with statutes that require that all 4 elements be provided were no more likely than other states to include them (Fisher exact test = 1.000). Fewer than 40% of forms supported models of shared decision making. CONCLUSIONS: The content of most forms did not meet accepted standards of informed consent or patient-physician interactions. We propose a form that more fully supports the models of ideal informed consent and shared decision making to enhance the applicability of informed consent in the clinical setting.

Ethics, Medical↗

PubMed2003

Beliefs and expectations of women under 50 years old regarding screening mammography: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: Because shared decision making has been recommended for screening mammography by women under age 50, we studied women's decision-making process regarding the procedure. DESIGN: Qualitative research design using in-depth semi-structured interviews. PATIENTS: Sixteen white and African-American women aged 38 to 45 receiving care at a large New England medical practice. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified the following content areas in women's decision-making process: intentions for screening, motivating factors to undergo screening, attitudes toward screening mammography, attitudes toward breast cancer, and preferences for information and shared decision making. In our sample, all women had or intended to have a screening mammogram before age 50. They were motivated by the awareness of the recommendation to begin screening at age 40, knowing others with breast cancer, and a sense of personal responsibility for their health. Participants feared breast cancer and thought the benefits of screening mammography far outweighed its risks. Women's preferences for involvement in decision making varied from wanting full responsibility for screening decisions to deferring to their medical providers. All preferred the primary care provider to be the main source of information, yet the participants stated that their own providers played a limited role in educating them about the risks and benefits of screening and the mammography procedure itself. Most of their information was derived from the media. CONCLUSIONS: The women in this study demonstrated little ambivalence in their desire for mammography screening prior to age 50. They reported minimal communication with their medical providers about the risks and benefits of screening. Better information flow regarding mammography screening is necessary. Given the lack of uncertainty among women's perceptions regarding screening mammography, shared decision making in this area may be difficult to achieve.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Long-term effects of a shared decision-making intervention on physician-patient interaction and outcome in fibromyalgia. A qualitative and quantitative 1 year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) patients and their doctors frequently complain on interaction difficulties. We investigated the effects of a shared decision-making (SDM) intervention on physician-patient interaction and health outcome. METHODS: Sixty-seven FMS patients of an outpatient university setting that had been included in a randomized controlled trial were followed up. They were either treated in an SDM group or in an information group. Both groups saw a computer based information tool on FMS, but only the SDM group was treated by doctors which underwent a special SDM communication training. A comparison group of 44 FMS patients receiving treatment as usual was recruited in rheumatological practices. We assessed patients and their doctors using a combined qualitative and quantitative approach. Patients and doctors were followed-up after 3 months (T2) and after 1 year (T3). RESULTS: The significantly best quality of physician-patient interaction was reported by patients and doctors of the SDM group, followed by the information group. Coping had more often improved in the SDM group than in the information group. However directly health related outcome variables had not improved in any of the groups at T3. CONCLUSION: An SDM intervention can lead to an improved physician-patient relationship from the patients' and from the doctors' perspective. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: It should be considered to include SDM in standard care for FMS patients.

Adaptation, Psychological↗

PubMed2006

[Shared decision-making with hypertensive patients. Results of an implementation in Germany].

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Lack of compliance is a common problem in the treatment of hypertension. Ineffective physician-patient-communication and a lack of patients involvement can play a crucial role. We tested the hypothesis that shared decision-making (SDM) results in higher involvement of patients in their blood pressure lowering therapy and evaluated the effects of SDM on the control of blood pressure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two groups of 84 hypertensives were compared: an intervention group (26 women and 13 men, age 61 +/- 10 years) treated by 15 specially SDM-trained primary care physicians, and a control group of 45 hypertensives. All 84 patients were enrolled in a patient education programme. Changes of blood pressure were assessed after one year by self-measurements. Questionnaires about their attitude to patient autonomy, the SDM process, quality of life, physician-patient-relationship and life-style changes were analysed as well. RESULTS: After one year the blood pressure had decreased in both the intervention group (-9.26 +/- 10.2/-5.3 +/- 9.5 mmHg, p < 0.001) and in the control group (-6.0 +/- 11.8/-3.0 +/- 8.3 mmHg, p < 0.05), without a significant difference between the two groups. Among a subgroup of patients with a marked preference for SDM there was a close correlation between an increase of SDM and a decrease in systolic blood pressure (p = 0.016). Also, the numbers of antihypertensive drugs increased more in the intervention group (p = 0.022) than in control patients. Furthermore, increase in knowledge about hypertension and its treatment was greater in the intervention group (P=0.006). CONCLUSION: Implementation of SDM had a significant effect on systolic blood pressure control only in the subgroup of patients with marked preference for SDM. Thus, the identification of patients with a preference for SDM may improve blood pressure control and their adherence to the prescribed drug therapy.

Adult↗

PubMed1986

Relationship quality of partners in heterosexual married, heterosexual cohabiting, and gay and lesbian relationships.

The relationship quality of partners in 44 married, 35 heterosexual cohabiting, 50 gay, and 56 lesbian monogamous couples was studied. Each couple lived together and did not have children living with them. Relationship quality was dimensionalized as love for partner, liking of partner, and relationship satisfaction. Cohabiting partners had the lowest Love for Partner and Relationship Satisfaction scores. Differences were also found among partner types on: barriers to leaving the relationship, alternatives to the relationship, a belief that mindreading is expected in the relationship, masculinity, femininity, androgyny, dyadic attachment, shared decision making, and perceived social support from family. The four partner groups did not differ in psychological adjustment. For each type of partner, love for partner was related to many barriers to leaving the relationship and high dyadic attachment; liking of partner was related to few alternatives to the relationship, high dyadic attachment, and high shared decision making; and relationship satisfaction was related to many attractions, few alternatives, few beliefs regarding disagreement is destructive to the relationship, high dyadic attachment, and high shared decision making. Stepwise multiple regression procedures were used to identify the best set of predictors for each partner type. Results are discussed in the context of existing models of relationship quality.

Adaptation, Psychological↗

PubMed2001

Measuring the involvement of patients in shared decision-making: a systematic review of instruments.

We wanted to determine whether research instruments exist which focus on measuring to what extent health professionals involve patients in treatment and management decisions. A systematic search and appraisal of the relevant literature was conducted by electronic searching techniques, snowball sampling and correspondence with field specialists. The instruments had to concentrate on assessing patient involvement in decision-making by observation techniques (either direct or using audio or videotaped data) and contain assessments of the core aspects of 'involvement', namely evidence of patients being involved (explicitly or implicitly) in decision-making processes, a portrayal of options and a decision-making or deferring stage. Eight instruments met the inclusion criteria. But we did not find any instruments that had been specifically designed to measure the concept of 'involving patients' in decisions. The results reveal that little attention has been given to a detailed assessment of the processes of patient involvement in decision-making. The existing instrumentation only includes these concepts as sub-units within broader assessments, and does not allow the construct of patient involvement to be measured accurately. Instruments developed to measure 'patient-centeredness' are unable to provide enough focus on 'involvement' because of their attempt to cover so many dimensions. The concept of patient involvement (shared decision-making; informed collaborative choice) is emerging in the literature and requires an accurate method of assessment.

Decision Making↗

PubMed2006

Cultural influences on the physician-patient encounter: The case of shared treatment decision-making.

OBJECTIVE: In this paper we discuss the influence of culture on the process of treatment decision-making, and in particular, shared treatment decision-making in the physician-patient encounter. We explore two key issues: (1) the meaning of culture and the ways that it can affect treatment decision-making; (2) cultural issues and assumptions underlying the development and use of treatment decision aids. METHODS: This is a conceptual paper. Based on our knowledge and reading of the key literature in the treatment decision-making field, we looked for written examples where cultural influences were taken into account when discussing the physician-patient encounter and when designing instruments (decision aids) to help patients participate in making decisions. RESULTS: Our assessment of the situation is that to date, and with some recent exceptions, research in the above areas has not been culturally sensitive. CONCLUSION: We suggest that more research attention should be focused on exploring potential cultural variations in the meaning of and preferences for shared decision-making as well as on the applicability across cultural groups of decision aids developed to facilitate patient participation in treatment decision-making with physicians. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Both patients and physicians need to be aware of the cultural assumptions underlying the development and use of decision aids and assess their cultural sensitivity to the needs and preferences of patients in diverse cultural groups.

Culture↗

PubMed2006

Patient-centered informed consent in surgical practice.

OBJECTIVES: To review the medical, ethical, and legal basis of the doctrine of informed consent for surgery and its complications, particularly for an incapacitated patient who requires a surrogate decision maker; to discuss the elasticity of the consent doctrine, whether surgical consent encompasses consent for surgical complications, and emphasize the importance of communication and shared decision making in the context of the patient-surgeon relationship; and to discuss patient and surrogate refusal of treatment, standards of surrogate decision making, barriers to effective communication, the role of the hospital ethics committee in resolving disputes over treatment, and how to reconceptualize surgical consent in the context of patient-centered medicine. DATA SOURCES: We reviewed PubMed citations for informed consent in surgery, patient-physician communication, shared decision making, patient-centered medicine, and consent guidelines published by specialty societies, particularly the American College of Surgeons and the Society for Critical Care Medicine. STUDY SELECTION: We selected articles in which issues of consent for surgical treatment were discussed or measured. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted data relevant to questions of consent in surgical practice. DATA SYNTHESIS: We studied qualitative aspects of the consent doctrine. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical consent is not an event or a signature on a form but is an ongoing process of communication that continues throughout preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative care. In the context of patient-centered medicine, consent is best conceptualized as shared decision making with patients or their surrogates.

Advance Directive Adherence↗

PubMed2006

Observing decision-making in the general practice consultation: who makes which decisions?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate opportunities for, and types of decision making in the general practice (primary care) consultation, and examine differences in skills of those doctors who are successful at meeting their patients' preferences and those who are less successful. DESIGN: Observation study of doctor-patient consultations in general practice. PARTICIPANTS: Patients attending for routine appointments in 12 general practice surgeries across Oxfordshire. METHODS: A total of 212 doctor-patient consultations were video-recorded. The patients involved completed a questionnaire to elicit their perceptions of how decisions were made. The video-taped recordings were coded with a new instrument, the Evidence Based Patient Choice Instrument (EBPCI), to classify the number and type of decision-making opportunities arising during each consultation. A total of 149 recordings were coded using the Oxbridge Rating Scale to assess the doctors' consultation styles. RESULTS: There was a range of decision-making opportunities in addition to those involving medical treatment. With the exception of 'fitness for work', decisions were generally 'doctor led'. There was only moderate agreement between patient perceptions of their level of involvement in decision making and the objective ratings using the EBPCI. There was wide variation in the ability of doctors to meet their patients' preferences for involvement. CONCLUSIONS: There are many decisions made in primary care consultations, in addition to those about medical treatments, in which patients could be involved to a greater extent than they currently are. Some doctors are significantly better than others at meeting different patients' preferences for their decision-making role. Patients' perceptions of shared decision making appears to be influenced by the doctors' general consultation skills.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Shared decision-making in question.

Over recent years, communication within the physician-patient relationship has been profoundly changing. New modes of conveying diagnostic and therapeutic information influence the way in which decisions regarding treatment are made. We propose a critical review of the various theoretical models as presented in the literature, from the paternalistic to the shared decision model, in order to reveal conceptual ambiguities and their related methodological problems. This analysis leads to a project for clarifying these problems through a research protocol based on shared decision-making.

Communication↗

PubMed2001

Antibiotics and shared decision-making in primary care.

Antibiotics are often prescribed to patients with respiratory tract infections who are unlikely to benefit. Models of physician-patient interaction may help understanding of this problem and inform the design of communication skills interventions to enhance appropriate prescribing. The 'paternalistic model' of the consultation remains common in the setting of acute respiratory tract infections. However, the four assumptions that could support this model are not valid for most of these patients, because: best treatment is controversial; management is inconsistent; physicians are not in the best position to evaluate trade-offs between management options without understanding patients' perspectives; and many pressures (apart from patients' agendas) intrude into the consultation. One alternative is the 'informed model' of consulting, but this does not take society's interests into account. The 'shared decision-making model', however, provides a framework for addressing both clinicians' and patients' agendas, and could guide the development and evaluation of specific consultation strategies to promote more appropriate use of antibiotics in primary care.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗

PubMed2000

Informed adherence: the need for shared medical decision making.

Screening tests for colon cancer, breast cancer, and elevated serum cholesterol are widely advocated and included in some practice guidelines. Failure to complete these tests is regarded as patient noncompliance. The purpose of this paper is to review noncompliance with screening tests from the perspective of a traditional biomedical model and an outcomes model. According to the traditional biomedical model, compliance with screening tests is necessary to identify disease at an early stage and to initiate treatment. In contrast, the outcomes model argues that patients and providers should engage in activities that maximize benefit from the patient's perspective. Screening may lead to significant increases in case identification and in treatment rates. However, screening might also identify "pseudodisease," defined as disease that is not clinically important. For some diagnostic tests, cases of pseudodisease far exceed cases of clinically meaningful disease. The outcomes model suggests shared medical decision making in which uncertainties surrounding tests are disclosed to patients. Using information about the risks and expected health outcomes of screening and treatment, patients can participate in decisions about their own health care. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:233S-240S

Aged↗

PubMed1993

Responding to the challenge. A status report on shared decision-making programs.

Interactive video programs have been developed to provide patients with tailored information about treatment choices for their medical conditions. The article provides a status report on the use and production of these programs. Evaluation results are presented in terms of patient satisfaction, patient preference shifts and impacts on clinical practice. The future of shared medical decision-making is discussed.

Decision Making↗

PubMed2001

Health decisions and decision support for women.

Women are more likely to live longer with chronic illness and have a long-term relationship with their health care provider; this requires a situation in which patients and providers have a role in managing illness. In this chapter, the authors provide a conceptual overview of decision making along with key issues: historical concepts related to patients and providers, consumerism, informed choice/consent, patient rights, shared decision making, patient involvement, as well as an overview of models of patient/provider partnerships. This review builds on the work of O'Connor et al. (1999), which resulted in a Cochrane review of decision aids and focuses the examination of patient decision aids that support women's decisions regarding health treatment or screening. The authors conclude with a look to the future and recommendations for research in the area of shared decision making and health care decision aids.

Decision Making↗

PubMed2006

Why doctors use or do not use ethics consultation.

BACKGROUND: Ethics consultation is used regularly by some doctors, whereas others are reluctant to use these services. AIM: To determine factors that may influence doctors to request or not request ethics consultation. METHODS: A survey questionnaire was distributed to doctors on staff at the University Community Hospital in Tampa, Florida, USA. The responses to the questions on the survey were arranged in a Likert Scale, from strongly disagree, somewhat disagree, neither agree nor disagree, somewhat agree to strongly agree. Data were analysed with the Wilcoxon test for group comparisons, the chi2 test to compare proportions and a logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 186 surveys distributed, 121 were returned, giving a 65% response rate. Demographic data were similar between the groups saying yes (I do/would use ethics consultation when indicated) and no (I do not/would not use ethics consultation when indicated). No statistically significant differences were observed between the user and non-user groups in terms of opinions about ethics consultants having extensive training in ethics or participating in ethics educational opportunities. On the issue "Ethics committee members or consultants cannot grasp the full picture from the outside", the non-users were neutral, whereas the users somewhat disagreed (p=0.012). Even more significant was the difference between surgeons and non-surgeons, where, by logistic regression analysis, surgeons who believed that ethics consultants could not grasp the full picture from the outside were highly likely to not use (p=0.0004). Non-users of ethics consultations thought that it was their responsibility to resolve issues with the patient or family (72.2% agree, p<0.05). Users of ethics consultation believed in shared decision making or the importance of alternate points of view (90.8% agree, p<0.05). IMPLICATIONS: Ethics consultations are used by doctors who believe in shared decision making. Doctors who did not use ethics consultation tended to think that it was their responsibility to resolve issues with patients and families and that they were already proficient in ethics.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed2004

Risk management. Discussing benefits and risks with patients. PSA testing.

Obtaining valid consent from patients is good medical practice and a legal necessity. The process of obtaining consent involves shared decision making and a discussion of benefits and risks with patients. This article uses the example of PSA screening to explore the issue of shared decision making and outlines some strategies for general practitioners to use when discussing risks with patients.

Australia↗

PubMed2003

Effect of communications training on medical student performance.

CONTEXT: Although physicians' communication skills have been found to be related to clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction, teaching of communication skills has not been fully integrated into many medical school curricula or adequately evaluated with large-scale controlled trials. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether communications training for medical students improves specific competencies known to affect outcomes of care. DESIGN AND SETTING: A communications curriculum instituted in 2000-2001 at 3 US medical schools was evaluated with objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs). The same OSCEs were administered to a comparison cohort of students in the year before the intervention. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred thirty-eight randomly selected medical students (38% of eligible students) in the comparison cohort, tested at the beginning and end of their third year (1999-2000), and 155 students in the intervention cohort (42% of eligible students), tested at the beginning and end of their third year (2000-2001). INTERVENTION: Comprehensive communications curricula were developed at each school using an established educational model for teaching and practicing core communication skills and engaging students in self-reflection on their performance. Communications teaching was integrated with clinical material during the third year, required clerkships, and was supported by formal faculty development. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Standardized patients assessed student performance in OSCEs on 21 skills related to 5 key patient care tasks: relationship development and maintenance, patient assessment, education and counseling, negotiation and shared decision making, and organization and time management. Scores were calculated as percentage of maximum possible performance. RESULTS: Adjusting for baseline differences, students exposed to the intervention significantly outperformed those in the comparison cohort on the overall OSCE (65.4% vs 60.4%; 5.1% difference; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9%-6.3%; P<.001), relationship development and maintenance (5.3% difference; 95% CI, 3.8%-6.7%; P<.001), organization and time management (1.8% difference; 95% CI, 1.0%-2.7%; P<.001), and subsets of cases addressing patient assessment (6.7% difference; 95% CI, 5.9%-7.8%; P<.001) and negotiation and shared decision making (5.7% difference; 95% CI, 4.5%-6.9%; P<.001). Similar effects were found at each of the 3 schools, though they differed in magnitude. CONCLUSIONS: Communications curricula using an established educational model significantly improved third-year students' overall communications competence as well as their skills in relationship building, organization and time management, patient assessment, and negotiation and shared decision making-tasks that are important to positive patient outcomes. Improvements were observed at each of the 3 schools despite adaptation of the intervention to the local curriculum and culture.

Clinical Competence↗

PubMed2006

Involving patients in primary care consultations: assessing preferences using discrete choice experiments.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) involves patients and doctors contributing as partners to treatment decisions. It is not known whether or to what extent SDM contributes to the welfare arising from a consultation, and how important this contribution is relative to other attributes of a consultation. AIM: To identify patient preferences for SDM relative to other utility bearing attributes of a consultation. DESIGN OF STUDY: In parallel with a randomised trial in training GPs in SDM competencies and risk communication skills, a discrete choice experiment exercise was conducted to assess patients' utilities. SETTING: Twenty general practices in South Wales, UK. METHOD: Five hundred and eighty-four responders from 747 patients attending the randomised trial (response rate = 78%). All patients had one of four conditions (atrial fibrillation, menorrhagia, menopausal symptoms or prostatism) and attended a consultation with a doctor in their own practice. Patients were randomised to attend a consultation either with a doctor who had received no training in the study or risk communication training alone or SDM training alone, or both combined. RESULTS: Five key utility bearing attributes of a consultation were identified. All significantly influenced patient's choice of preferred consultation style (P<0.001). Larger increases in utility were associated with changes on "doctor listens" attribute, followed by easily understood information, a shared treatment decision, more information and longer consultation. Utilities were influenced by whether the doctor had received risk communication training alone or SDM training alone, or both combined, prior to the consultations. The randomised trial itself had identified that the communication processes of these consultations changed significantly, with greater patient involvement in decision making, after the training interventions. CONCLUSION: Shared treatment decisions were valued less than some other attributes of a consultation. However, patient utilities for such involvement appeared responsive to changes in experiences of consultations. This suggests that SDM may gain greater value among patients once they have experienced it.

Atrial Fibrillation↗