Search PubMed⌕ Search

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.

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

At least 271 records · Page 15Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Interactional styles of nurse practitioners and physicians regarding patient decision making.

The purpose of this study was to describe interactional styles used by nurse practitioners and physicians in their attempts to influence patients' decision making. The ethical concepts of paternalism, maternalism, and shared decision making (operationalized as command, consequence, and concordance, respectively) formed the conceptual framework for the analysis of the interactions. Videotaped interactions of 85 physicians and 42 nurse practitioners in either joint or solo practice were analyzed. Tests of a priori hypotheses using hierarchical log-linear modeling yielded the following significant results: Males and physicians in solo practice used more command statements and fewer consequence statements than females and nurse practitioners in solo practice, who used fewer command statements and more consequence statements. All groups used more command/consequence statements than concordance statements.

Decision Making↗
PubMed2004

Seeking informed consent to cancer clinical trials: describing current practice.

Clinical trials have come to be regarded as the gold standard for treatment evaluation. However, many doctors and their patients experience difficulties when discussing trials, leading to poor accrual to trials and questionable quality of informed consent. We have previously developed a typology for ethical communication about Phase II and III clinical trials within four domains: (a) shared decision making, (b) sequencing information, (c) type and clarity of information, and (d) disclosure/coercion. The aim of this study was to compare current clinical practice when seeking informed consent with this typology. Fifty-nine consultations in which 10 participating oncologists sought informed consent were audiotaped. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using a coding system to (a) identify the presence or absence of aspects of the four domains and (b) rate the quality of aspects of two domains: (i) shared decision-making and (ii) type and clarity of information. Oncologists rarely addressed aspects of shared decision-making, other than offering to delay a treatment decision (78%). Moreover, many of these discussions scored poorly with respect to ideal content. The oncologists were rarely consistent with the sequence of information provision. A general rationale for randomising was only described in 46% of consultations. In almost one third of the consultations (28.8%) doctors made implicit statements favouring one option over another, either standard or clinical trial treatment. Doctors complied with some but not other aspects of a standard procedure for discussing clinical trials. This reflects the difficulty inherent in seeking ethical informed consent and the need for communication skills training for oncologists.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Impact of an educational video on patient decision making in early breast cancer treatment.

Previous research suggests that patient education programs promoting shared decision making (SDM) may improve patient satisfaction and outcomes, yet controlled clinical trials are lacking. The authors evaluate the impact of an early breast cancer treatment educational video on patients' decisional preferences and behavior. Newly diagnosed stage I/stage II breast cancer patients were assigned to SDM video program or control groups in alternating months. Surveys were administered prior to the provider visit and 1 week following the treatment decision. Variables assessed included autonomy preferences, perceived involvement in care, satisfaction, and treatment choice. There were no significant intervention effects on informational/decisional preferences, anxiety, knowledge, or satisfaction. Although 25% of SDM patients chose mastectomy compared to 14% of controls, this difference was not statistically significant. Eventhough enthusiasm for SDM programs remains high among some patients and providers, this study found only modest benefits.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Association of a traditional vs shared meal decision-making and preparation style with eating behavior of Hispanic women in San Diego County.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the influence of meal decision-making and preparation on Hispanic women's dietary practices. DESIGN: One-on-one structured interviews were conducted, assessing meal decision-making and preparation practices, barriers, and behavioral strategies to eating low-fat and high-fiber diets, fat and fiber intake, demographic, and other psychosocial factors. SUBJECTS/SETTING: The study population included 357 Hispanic women living in the southern or central regions of San Diego County. Participants were recruited via random-digit dialing to a tailored nutrition communication intervention. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Household decision-making style (alone vs with family) by household activity (decides meals, prepares meals, and decides snacks). STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: Multiple logistic regressions were used to evaluate associations between the predictors and dependent variable. All models included adjustments for potential confounders, such as marital status, education, employment, age, and acculturation. RESULTS: A positive statistical association between Hispanic women's acculturation level and shared decision-making style was found. Also, Hispanic women in shared decision-making households faced greater psychosocial barriers to healthful eating and reported less healthful eating compared with Hispanic women in traditional households. Women in shared decision-making households were more likely to eat at fast-food restaurants, less likely to engage in behavioral strategies promoting fiber consumption, eat more saturated fat, and encounter more barriers to reduce dietary fat as compared with Hispanic women in traditional households. Acculturation did not attenuate differences in psychosocial and dietary practices between shared decision-making and traditional households. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings suggest intervention efforts should focus on different aspects of healthful eating among Hispanic women in shared-decision, compared with traditional, households.

Acculturation↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Systolic hypertension in older persons: complexities in clinical decision making.

While the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) challenges clinicians to aggressively manage systolic hypertension, few data are available to guide clinicians in treating older persons with this condition. In older persons, hypertension treatment decisions must often rely on extrapolations and fall into a gray area where optimal choice for an individual patient may be unclear. In these instances, patients must understand the probable outcomes of options, consider the personal value they place on benefits vs. risks, and participate with their practitioners in deciding on treatment. Shared decision making is the process by which the health care provider and patient share all stages of the decision-making process and both discuss treatment preferences and agree on a final management plan. Our challenge as clinicians is to ensure that all older patients have the opportunity to be treated in a way that is evidence-based and patient-centered. As with most health care decisions in older persons, those regarding blood pressure control should promote evidence-based care that is complementary with individualized risk, benefit ratios, patient preferences, and treatment goals.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2004

Who wants to be involved? Decision-making preferences among residents of long-term care facilities.

While the benefits of participating in care or medical decision making are widely reported, research on decision-making participation preferences usually reveals some portion of individuals who do not want to be involved. Data collected through structured, in-person interviews with 100 residents of six long-term care (LTC) facilities in Victoria, British Columbia, were used to examine participation preferences with respect to four types of care decisions (bedtimes, medication choice, room transfer, and advance directives), as well as predictors of these preferences. Residents with higher levels of formal education, a greater number of chronic conditions, and greater confidence about the worth of their input tend to prefer more active involvement in decision making. This research also suggests that predictors of preference for independent control over decision making (active involvement) differ from predictors of preference for joint or shared decision making. Implications for the empowerment of LTC facility residents and the meaning of decision-making involvement in these environments are discussed.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

A shared treatment decision-making approach between patients with chronic conditions and their clinicians: the case of diabetes.

In this paper, we discuss the Charles et al. approach to shared treatment decision-making (STDM) as applied to patients with chronic conditions and their clinicians. We perceive differences between the type of treatment decisions (e.g. end-of-life care, surgical treatment of cancer) that generated existing approaches of shared decision-making for acute care conditions (including the Charles et al. model) and the treatment decisions that patients with chronic conditions need to make and revisit on an ongoing basis. For instance, treatment decisions in the chronic care setting are more likely to require a more active patient role in carrying out the decision and to offer a longer window of opportunity to make decisions and to revisit and reverse them without important loss than acute care decisions. The latter may require minimal patient participation to realize, are often urgent, and may be irreversible. Given these differences, we explore the applicability of the Charles et al. model of STDM in the chronic care context, especially chronic care that relies heavily on patient self-management (e.g. diabetes). To apply the Charles et al. model in this clinical context, we suggest the need to emphasize the patient-clinician relationship as one of partners in making difficult treatment choices and to add a new component to the shared decision-making approach: the need for an ongoing partnership between the clinical team (not just the clinician) and the patient. In the last section of the paper, we explore potential healthcare system barriers to STDM in chronic care delivery. Throughout the discussion we identify areas for further research.

Aged↗
PubMed1989

When families cannot "let go": ethical decision-making at the bedside.

Shared decision-making at the bedside is now a regular feature of medical practice. When disagreements arise between a patient and family members caregivers sometimes find themselves caught in a complex tangle of human relationships that strains monochrome ethical thinking. The patient's expressed wishes are often compromised for the sake of the family's needs. Conversely, a unilateral appeal for patient autonomy may prove insensitive to the hurt and the needs of the family. We describe a relatively unsuccessful attempt by a patient's caregivers to buy time to maximize the interests of the patient and her family and discuss the way in which the family dynamics militated against the rather obvious solution of promoting the patient's right to refuse treatment. The purpose of this article is not to evoke sympathy for health care professionals in dealing with such conflicts but rather to heighten awareness of the issues at stake and to stimulate thinking about ways and means to bring about a more favourable outcome than the one described here.

Decision Making↗