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 379 records · Page 21Linked to original sources
PubMed1997

Approaches to prostate cancer by managed care organizations.

OBJECTIVES: Managed care organizations (MCOs) are developing population-based approaches to illnesses with large numbers of patients, wide variations in care and outcomes, and high costs. This is the first survey that evaluates current prostate cancer approaches by MCOs. METHODS: Case studies and a survey of corporate medical directors at large MCOs were conducted. RESULTS: Two approaches, broadly based on disease management strategies for men with prostate cancer, have been implemented in managed care settings on the West Coast. While both have provided comprehensive approaches to the disease, assessment of improvement in outcomes will require longer follow-up. A survey of corporate medical directors of MCOs indicates that population-based disease approaches nationwide for malignant prostate disease lag behind more well-developed efforts for nonmalignant illnesses such as diabetes and asthma. CONCLUSIONS: Prostate cancer may be a feasible area for development and evaluation of population-based approaches. MCOs have the potential to improve clinical care and outcomes for large numbers of men with prostate cancer. While limitations exist related to specific managed care considerations of data needs and lack of medical and surgical consensus on disease management, programs based on shared decision making have the potential to improve patient care and outcomes.

Health Care Surveys↗
PubMed2001

Advance directives and establishing the goals of care.

This article addresses advance directives and methods to establish the goals of care for remaining life in the decisional and nondecisional patient. Without these discussions, patient autonomy is negated, and the opportunity to provide patient-centered care using shared decision making is lost.

Advance Directives↗
PubMed2001

Decision analysis in patient care.

To help patients to fully participate in shared decision making is becoming an important goal in clinical practice and one which is receiving increasing attention in terms of the requisite skills and technological development. We discuss the potential application of decision analysis-a specific technology that has been introduced into clinical practice but to date only within research contexts-and examine the usefulness and feasibility of the technique for patients, particularly in settings where clinical presentations are diverse and characterised by uncertainty.

Decision Support Techniques↗
PubMed2000

Informed consent in palliative radiotherapy: participation of patients and proxies in treatment decisions.

Informed consent is regularly discussed, but little attention has been paid to the daily practice of the patient participation in treatment decisions regarding palliative care. Therefore, an exploratory study was conducted into shared decision making between radiation oncologists and patients and proxies in interviews where decisions regarding palliative radiotherapy have to be made. Interviews of 6 radiation oncologists with 26 outpatients were recorded on audiotape. Each verbal utterance was coded with the aid of the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS). Results indicated that in over 75% of the interviews, patients and proxies were not asked for their opinion regarding treatment decisions. Other treatment options or the option of abstaining from treatment were discussed in 46% of the interviews. In conclusion, in this sample informed consent was not a natural part of the daily practice of palliative radiotherapy. The question remains to what extent informed consent in palliative radiotherapy is realistic.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

Validation of a tool to assess health practitioners' decision support and communication skills.

As patients become more involved in decisions affecting their health, it is important to monitor and improve the support clinicians provide to facilitate shared decision making. The Decision Support Analysis Tool (DSAT) was developed as a research tool to evaluate practitioners' use of decision support and related communication skills during a clinical encounter. The DSAT, consisting of six categories of decision support skills and four categories of communication skills, was tested with 34 actual transcripts of patient-physician dialogue. The patients were prepared for the clinical encounter with either a detailed decision aid plus worksheet (n=16) or a pamphlet (n=18). Pairs of raters, blinded to the intervention allocation, coded each transcript independently. The overall inter-rater agreement and kappa coefficients were, respectively 75% and 0.59 for the decision support skills and 76% and 0.68 for the communication skills categories. The frequency of DSAT skills coded: (a) were significantly correlated with three out of six patient and physician outcome measures (r>0.30, P<0.05); and (b) showed significant discrimination (P=0.05) or trends (P<0.15) in discrimination between the decision aid and pamphlet groups. The DSAT shows promise as a reliable and valid evaluation tool but requires further testing with larger samples.

Communication↗
PubMed2003

Concordance in cancer medication management.

This article explores how the concept of concordance can help to identify gaps and opportunities for research on consumer-provider communication related to cancer medication management. The relationship of concordance, patient-centered care and shared decision making is examined. Research on unmet patient agendas, quality of life issues related to symptom management and tools to assist communication about patient somatic experience are discussed. The need for research on patient communication with pharmacists, nurses and other health team members beyond physicians is noted. Research implications for longitudinal, descriptive and intervention studies are offered.

Communication↗
PubMed1999

A historical perspective of informed consent in clinical practice and research.

OBJECTIVES: To review the historical perspective of informed consent in clinical practice and research as it pertains to human subjects. DATA SOURCES: Published professional journals, books, case law, and the internet pertaining to the historical development of informed consent. CONCLUSIONS: The history of informed consent is complex. Informed consent as a fundamental principle of clinical ethics has developed within the past 50 years. Full disclosure and shared decision making have not come naturally to clinicians. Consequently, respecting the autonomy of patients and research subjects requires a conscious, sustained effort by clinicians. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Knowledge of the history of informed consent is important for practicing cancer nurses to ensure they understand the significance of preserving patient autonomy and advocate for the patient and research subject.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed1993

Changing perspectives on hospital governance.

In the light of fundamental changes in the delivery of health and social services in Canada, hospital governance must be concerned with protection and enhancement of the organization on behalf of the owner (i.e., taxpayer) as well as accountability to the community it was established to serve. Based on a review of current literature, the authors suggest that the roles and responsibilities of a hospital board entail seven major activities: establish the mission, philosophy and future directions of the institution; choose and evaluate the chief executive officer; establish the ethical principles for the organization; ensure high quality care and services; attract resources to the institution and ensure their effective use; integrate the organization with its environment; and undertake its own self-evaluation, education and development. To play these roles effectively, hospital boards will need to develop more direct links with their communities and learn to share decision making with them.

Canada↗
PubMed1999

Talking with patients about alternative and complementary medicine.

The growing use of alternative and complementary therapies in the United States as well as other parts of the world is a trend that the responsible rheumatologist cannot ignore. With chronic musculoskeletal conditions being the leading indication for the use of alternative and complementary therapies, rheumatologists must become experts on talking to patients and advising them about the use or avoidance of such therapies. Currently, there is a growing body of literature on the safety and efficacy of the multiple alternative and complementary therapies available. Much of this information is reliable and of high methologic quality; however, much of it is not. With an increase in the budget of the Office of Alternative Medicine from $20 to $50 million in 1999 and the status of the office changing to an independent center, an important step has been taken to try to assure improved research in the near future to validate or disprove many of the current alternative and complementary therapies. In the meantime, our patients are using these therapies and are likely to continue to do so, with or without our guidance. We must get beyond the "don't ask, don't tell" approach that characterizes many physicians' attitudes toward the subject of alternative and complementary therapies. Although all discussions need not end in agreement, they are still opportunities for shared decision making and "relationship-centered care." Ultimately, we should not be concerned with practicing what is perceived to be traditional versus alternative and complementary medicine or biomedicine versus naturalistic medicine but only with what is truly "good" medicine.

Communication↗
PubMed2001

Promoting adherence to inhaled therapy: building partnerships through patient education.

Optimal treatment outcomes are dependent upon patient adherence to therapy. Problems in adherence can be overcome by developing a professional-patient partnership that has the goal of developing communication between the partners, mutual accountability, respect for personal values and viewpoints, and shared decision making. The process of patient education is shaped by the needs of this developing partnership rather than a-priori goals established by the professional.

Administration, Inhalation↗
PubMed2003

Integrated care in schizophrenia: a 2-year randomized controlled study of two community-based treatment programs.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of two community-based programs that combined antipsychotic medication, family interventions and social skills training. METHOD: A randomized controlled trial with 2 years follow-up. The study included 84 patients with schizophrenic disorders, continuously managed in terms of care and treatment, and regularly assessed. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. RESULTS: Between-program comparisons showed significantly improved social function and consumer satisfaction in favour of the program 'Integrated Care' (IC) at the 2-year follow-up. The main clinically important differences between the two treatment programs studied were the procedures for shared decision making and patient empowerment in IC. CONCLUSION: The implementation of IC in clinical practice can improve social recovery and increase consumer satisfaction for patients with schizophrenic disorders. We identified specific procedures that might be added to improve the effectiveness of any program for severely mental ill people.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

An evaluation of the quality of commercially produced patient information leaflets.

AIM: A descriptive study was undertaken to assess the quality of a range of patient information leaflets produced by the British Dental Association. METHOD: Twenty-nine leaflets were assessed with regard to presentation, readability and quality. The topic areas covered included: treatment, self-care and disease related information. Presentation was evaluated with regard to layout, font size, typeface, use of illustrations, paper type and print colour. Readability was assessed using the Flesch reading grade and the SMOG reading grade. Quality was assessed using the DISCERN tool. FINDINGS: All leaflets scored quite well for readability, with the average SMOG Reading Grade Level being 9.10 (SD 0.80) and the average Flesch reading Grade Level being 6.18 (SD 0.83). There were, however, some areas of presentation that could be improved, specifically font size, illustration use and paper finish, which did not comply with the RNIB guidelines. Quality ratings using the DISCERN tool were low. In particular most leaflets scored poorly in setting out clear aims in the opening paragraph, in identifying sources and dates of information provided, and other sources of advice and support available. Few leaflets discussed the option of no treatment or how the treatment would affect overall quality of life. The role of shared decision making was rarely mentioned. CONCLUSION: Patient information leaflets produced commercially are of high production quality and good readability but tend not to be patient centred.

Health Education, Dental↗
PubMed2003

Orthopaedic assessment in haemophilia.

Outcomes may be measured in terms of both objective and subjective variables and also on the basis of cost-efficiency. Most tools currently used to quantify outcomes, especially in orthopaedics, involve measurements of general health and of specific body part or organ system function. Patients' expectations of medical care are linked to their requests for treatment and to their assessments of outcome and satisfaction. Rating results are fundamental to evaluation and comparison of different methods of treatment. The discrepancies existing among rating scales have been an impediment in the evaluation of haemophilic patients from the orthopaedic point of view. Progress depends on international cooperation to improve communication and on the evaluation of new surgical techniques. The World Federation of Haemophilia (WFH) physical joint examination instrument and the Colorado physical examination (PE) instruments made important contributions by developing forms that will serve as a foundation for future evaluation systems. Some authors have suggested that the Colorado PE instruments are more indicative of early joint dysfunction than the WFH instrument. Future goals of the Colorado PE instruments are to refine the standard forms, identify additional important reproducible criteria and develop a comprehensive method of evaluation. It is paramount to develop valid and reliable surveys that can be used preoperatively to direct patient education and shared decision making and to provide a framework for setting reasonable goals. Re-examining patients' responses postoperatively could provide a way to assess fulfilment of expectations, which is a crucial patient-derived measure of outcome and satisfaction.

Costs and Cost Analysis↗
PubMed2000

Quality assessment in general practice trainers.

INTRODUCTION: General practice trainers hold a key position in general practice training, especially through their provision of a role model. Their own competence in general practice care is important in this regard. The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether a quality assessment programme could identify the strengths and weaknesses of GP trainers in four main domains of general practice care. METHODS: The quality assessment programme comprised validated tests on four domains of general practice: general medical knowledge, knowledge of medical-technical skills, consultation skills and practice management. The criterion for the identification of relative strengths and weaknesses of GP trainers was a variation in the scores of trainers indicating higher and lower scores (strengths and weaknesses) within each domain. RESULTS: GP trainers (n=105) were invited to participate in the study and 90% (n=94) did so. The variation in scores allowed the indication of strengths and weaknesses. Main strengths were: general medical knowledge of the digestive system; knowledge of medical skills relating to the skin; consultation skills concerning empathy; practice management with regard to accessibility. Main weaknesses were: general medical knowledge of the neurological system; knowledge of the medical/technical skills relating to the endocrine metabolic and nutritional system; consultation skills regarding shared decision making; practice management involving cooperation with staff and other care providers. DISCUSSION: This first systematic evaluation of GP trainers identified their strengths and weaknesses. The weaknesses identified will be used in the improvement process as topics for collective improvement in the GP trainers' general curriculum and in individual learning plans.

Educational Measurement↗
PubMed1999

Customer focus: patient, organization and EQuIP in collaboration. Evaluation and Quality Improvement Program.

The Australian Council on Healthcare Standards (ACHS) Evaluation and Quality Improvement Program (EQuIP) calls on healthcare organizations to increase their focus on patients by using leadership to coordinate, and continuous improvement to guide, care delivery. At a large acute care private facility in Melbourne, a program has been developed to create a 'care partnership', characterized by shared decision making, collaboration and conciliation. This program enhances patient care through the coordination of three strategies, a patient communication strategy, an evaluation strategy and a quality improvement strategy. The program has resulted in patient guided reforms such as redesign of a patient information booklet, a hospital-wide discharge planning improvement initiative and a hospital-wide strategy to improve pain management. Through the creation of a care partnership, this program helps an acute care hospital focus its services and processes on one of its key customer groups, patients.

Australia↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Withholding and withdrawal of dialysis in the elderly.

The awareness that many patients eligible for dialysis may live lives in which the burdens of treatment outweigh the benefits has led the renal community to establish guidelines to assist the health care team in advising patients of the potential outcomes of living with or without dialysis. The guidelines published have been personal, consensual, and evidence based. They share in common the principles of shared decision making and informed consent. Only the patient or his surrogate should make the decision regarding initiation or cessation of dialysis.

Aged↗
PubMed1998

Comparing utilization of life-sustaining treatments with patient and public preferences.

OBJECTIVE: The movement for advance planning of end-of-life care was motivated in part by the assumption that medical intervention for terminally ill patients varies from what these patients would prefer. We examined the validity of this assumption by comparing actual life-sustaining treatment practices for patients in critical illness scenarios and surveyed patients' advance care preferences. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We selected at random and reviewed 7,400 inpatient medical records from a single urban teaching hospital during the period just prior to the Patient Self-Determination Act. Records of 198 patients with conditions that matched advance directive scenarios were examined, and practices to withhold or withdraw seven life-sustaining treatments were documented. Practices were compared with surveyed preferences of 102 members of the general public and 495 outpatients who were followed by the same physicians as the 198 patients. Concordance of practices and preferences for the 19 surveyed outpatients who eventually fell into one of the scenarios was also evaluated. One hundred sixty-seven inpatient cases met review criteria for the scenario coma with a small chance of recovery. Hospital patients received medical interventions that were not consistently greater or less than the preferences of the surveyed outpatients or members of the general public. Resuscitation, the most frequently withheld treatment (94% of cases), was withheld more often than surveyed preferences to decline it (56% of outpatients, p < .001). Four treatments--mechanical breathing, artificial nutrition, major surgery, and hemodialysis--were utilized comparably to surveyed outpatients' preferences (range p = .704-.055). Antibiotics and artificial hydration were withheld (9% and 6%, respectively) less often than surveyed outpatient's prior preferences to decline them (48% and 52%, respectively, p < .001 for each). Conversely, treatments given to the 19 surveyed patients who subsequently developed one of the illness scenarios were often incongruent with the patients' prior preferences. Again, in some cases more interventions were provided (26 of 63 declined treatments were given), and in some cases less (10 of 21 desired treatments were withheld). CONCLUSIONS: This study does not support the assumption that, collectively, patients' advance care preferences are less interventionist than actual practices for patients in corresponding scenarios. Nevertheless, these results do support the assumption that life-sustaining treatment decisions do not conform well to individual patients' specific preferences. Progress in end-of-life care should focus on shared decision making at the patient-proxy-physician level rather than on overall life-sustaining treatments utilization.

Advance Directives↗
PubMed1999

Patient preferences for colon cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE: To measure patient preferences for four different screening strategies: annual fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) alone; flexible sigmoidoscopy (FSIG) every 5 years alone; both annual FOBT and FSIG every 5 years; or no screening. DESIGN: Survey. SETTING: University internal medicine clinic. PATIENTS: Convenience sample of 146 adults (aged 50-75 years) with no previous history of colon cancer. INTERVENTION: Three-part educational program on colon cancer screening administered verbally by trained research assistants. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patient preferences for screening were measured at three points: after descriptive information about colon cancer and screening options (testing procedure information); after information about test performance but with no out-of-pocket costs (test performance information); and finally with hypothetical out-of-pocket costs (cost information). After only descriptive test information, the most popular strategies were FOBT alone (45%) or both tests (38%). Fewer patients preferred FSIG alone (13%). After information about test performance, more subjects preferred both tests (47%), and fewer subjects preferred FOBT alone (36%) (p =.12). With hypothetical out-of-pocket costs, the proportion preferring FOBT alone increased to 53%, while those preferring both tests decreased to 31% (p <.001). Less than 5% of patients preferred no screening. CONCLUSIONS: Patient preferences for colon cancer screening were modestly sensitive to information about test performance and strongly sensitive to out-of-pocket costs. The heterogeneity of patients' preferences for how to be screened supports informed shared decision making as a possible means of improving colon cancer screening.

Aged↗