Perceptions and Attitudes of People With Cancer and Diabetes Towards Patient Guidelines: A Mixed Methods Study

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Lijiao Yan, Ning Liang, Zeyu Yu, Loraine Cook, Sarah E. Scott, Karen Graham, Xing Liao, Haili Zhang, Jiale Hu, Nannan Shi, Jianping Liu
{"title":"Perceptions and Attitudes of People With Cancer and Diabetes Towards Patient Guidelines: A Mixed Methods Study","authors":"Lijiao Yan,&nbsp;Ning Liang,&nbsp;Zeyu Yu,&nbsp;Loraine Cook,&nbsp;Sarah E. Scott,&nbsp;Karen Graham,&nbsp;Xing Liao,&nbsp;Haili Zhang,&nbsp;Jiale Hu,&nbsp;Nannan Shi,&nbsp;Jianping Liu","doi":"10.1111/hex.70164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To explore patients' perceptions and attitudes towards patient guidelines (PGs) and to identify specific factors related to PG content, design, presentation, and management that may influence patients' use or adoption of PGs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>An exploratory sequential mixed-methods design was employed. Initial semi-structured interviews were conducted with a diverse group of individuals, including people with diabetes or oncology, and clinicians. These interviews were analysed through directed content analysis. Findings from the qualitative study were used to develop a questionnaire. The questionnaire was circulated to patients with diabetes and cancer and asked them to report their awareness, attitudes, and the PG-related factors influencing their use and adoption of PGs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>In total, 25 participants were interviewed qualitatively, and 400 participated in the quantitative survey. Analysis of interviews yielded three themes: perception of PGs, attitude towards PGs, and key PG attributes influencing patients' use or adoption of PG. Qualitative findings indicated limited awareness of PGs, supported quantitatively by only 26.5% of patients being aware of PGs. Attitudes varied, with 73.0% expressing an overall positive attitude towards PG, but only 17.3% preferred PGs for evidence-based answers and 32.3% favoured them for decision support, citing concerns that general recommendations may not meet individual needs. Participants suggested tailoring recommendations based on subgroups considering age, comorbidity, and weight, explaining why treatments work or don't work in different populations. Eight PG attributes influencing their use or adoption were found: accessibility, identifiability, attractiveness, credibility, usability, timeliness, relevance and simplicity. Lack of credibility was the most frequently mentioned hindrance, with 34.8% identifying unverifiable information as a barrier. Further qualitative and quantitative analyses revealed that medical staff were trusted sources for conveying PGs to patients.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions and Practice Implications</h3>\n \n <p>This study underscores the necessity for PGs to acknowledge individual differences and provide recommendations that are more tailored considering age, comorbidities, weight, and other factors influencing decision-making, ensuring that they address patients' specific needs and support informed decision-making. Additionally, there was a significant need to improve the dissemination of PGs, using medical staff as key channels to improve patients' use or adoption of PGs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>In this study, patients were actively involved in several stages. During the development of the interview guide, feedback from two patients, alongside one patient guidelines (PGs) developer and three clinicians, was incorporated to ensure the guide's relevance and comprehensiveness. Patients' insights were integral to refining the interview questions, ensuring they were appropriate and effective. Additionally, the survey questionnaire was pre-tested among 20 patients using the Think-Aloud method, which led to significant revisions for better comprehension and response quality. These steps highlight the essential role of patients in shaping the data collection instruments and enhancing the overall quality and relevance of the study.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55070,"journal":{"name":"Health Expectations","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11775387/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Expectations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70164","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To explore patients' perceptions and attitudes towards patient guidelines (PGs) and to identify specific factors related to PG content, design, presentation, and management that may influence patients' use or adoption of PGs.

Methods

An exploratory sequential mixed-methods design was employed. Initial semi-structured interviews were conducted with a diverse group of individuals, including people with diabetes or oncology, and clinicians. These interviews were analysed through directed content analysis. Findings from the qualitative study were used to develop a questionnaire. The questionnaire was circulated to patients with diabetes and cancer and asked them to report their awareness, attitudes, and the PG-related factors influencing their use and adoption of PGs.

Results

In total, 25 participants were interviewed qualitatively, and 400 participated in the quantitative survey. Analysis of interviews yielded three themes: perception of PGs, attitude towards PGs, and key PG attributes influencing patients' use or adoption of PG. Qualitative findings indicated limited awareness of PGs, supported quantitatively by only 26.5% of patients being aware of PGs. Attitudes varied, with 73.0% expressing an overall positive attitude towards PG, but only 17.3% preferred PGs for evidence-based answers and 32.3% favoured them for decision support, citing concerns that general recommendations may not meet individual needs. Participants suggested tailoring recommendations based on subgroups considering age, comorbidity, and weight, explaining why treatments work or don't work in different populations. Eight PG attributes influencing their use or adoption were found: accessibility, identifiability, attractiveness, credibility, usability, timeliness, relevance and simplicity. Lack of credibility was the most frequently mentioned hindrance, with 34.8% identifying unverifiable information as a barrier. Further qualitative and quantitative analyses revealed that medical staff were trusted sources for conveying PGs to patients.

Conclusions and Practice Implications

This study underscores the necessity for PGs to acknowledge individual differences and provide recommendations that are more tailored considering age, comorbidities, weight, and other factors influencing decision-making, ensuring that they address patients' specific needs and support informed decision-making. Additionally, there was a significant need to improve the dissemination of PGs, using medical staff as key channels to improve patients' use or adoption of PGs.

Patient or Public Contribution

In this study, patients were actively involved in several stages. During the development of the interview guide, feedback from two patients, alongside one patient guidelines (PGs) developer and three clinicians, was incorporated to ensure the guide's relevance and comprehensiveness. Patients' insights were integral to refining the interview questions, ensuring they were appropriate and effective. Additionally, the survey questionnaire was pre-tested among 20 patients using the Think-Aloud method, which led to significant revisions for better comprehension and response quality. These steps highlight the essential role of patients in shaping the data collection instruments and enhancing the overall quality and relevance of the study.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health Expectations
Health Expectations 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
9.40%
发文量
251
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Expectations promotes critical thinking and informed debate about all aspects of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health and social care, health policy and health services research including: • Person-centred care and quality improvement • Patients'' participation in decisions about disease prevention and management • Public perceptions of health services • Citizen involvement in health care policy making and priority-setting • Methods for monitoring and evaluating participation • Empowerment and consumerism • Patients'' role in safety and quality • Patient and public role in health services research • Co-production (researchers working with patients and the public) of research, health care and policy Health Expectations is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles and critical commentaries. It includes papers which clarify concepts, develop theories, and critically analyse and evaluate specific policies and practices. The Journal provides an inter-disciplinary and international forum in which researchers (including PPIE researchers) from a range of backgrounds and expertise can present their work to other researchers, policy-makers, health care professionals, managers, patients and consumer advocates.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信