Patient Values Influence Clinician Judgment of Medical Decision-Making Capacity.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q3 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Emilee M Ertle, Darby M Simon, Benjamin T Mast
{"title":"Patient Values Influence Clinician Judgment of Medical Decision-Making Capacity.","authors":"Emilee M Ertle, Darby M Simon, Benjamin T Mast","doi":"10.1080/07317115.2025.2505581","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Medical decision-making capacity assessments commonly focus on patient communication, understanding, appreciation, and reasoning, with less emphasis on patient values or preferences that could influence their medical decision. The current study investigates the role of patient values in capacity assessments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One hundred and ten clinicians with experience conducting medical decision-making capacity assessments completed an online survey. Participants read two vignettes about a patient with questionable capacity and were asked to determine whether the patient had capacity. For the second vignette, participants were randomly assigned to read a vignette which contained information about the patient's longstanding values or a vignette without this information.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When information about the patient's values and preferences was included in the vignette, participants were significantly more likely to determine the patient had capacity to make a medical decision. Other significant contributors to a clinician's judgment included experience conducting medical decision-making capacity assessments in a VA hospital and whether the clinician prioritized the patient's autonomy or their health and safety.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A patient's values and preferences provide important context which significantly influences clinician judgment of capacity.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>Clinicians should regularly assess a patient's values and preferences when conducting capacity assessments, as this may promote patient autonomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":10376,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Gerontologist","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Gerontologist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07317115.2025.2505581","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Medical decision-making capacity assessments commonly focus on patient communication, understanding, appreciation, and reasoning, with less emphasis on patient values or preferences that could influence their medical decision. The current study investigates the role of patient values in capacity assessments.

Methods: One hundred and ten clinicians with experience conducting medical decision-making capacity assessments completed an online survey. Participants read two vignettes about a patient with questionable capacity and were asked to determine whether the patient had capacity. For the second vignette, participants were randomly assigned to read a vignette which contained information about the patient's longstanding values or a vignette without this information.

Results: When information about the patient's values and preferences was included in the vignette, participants were significantly more likely to determine the patient had capacity to make a medical decision. Other significant contributors to a clinician's judgment included experience conducting medical decision-making capacity assessments in a VA hospital and whether the clinician prioritized the patient's autonomy or their health and safety.

Conclusions: A patient's values and preferences provide important context which significantly influences clinician judgment of capacity.

Clinical implications: Clinicians should regularly assess a patient's values and preferences when conducting capacity assessments, as this may promote patient autonomy.

患者价值观影响临床医生对医疗决策能力的判断。
目的:医疗决策能力评估通常侧重于患者的沟通、理解、欣赏和推理,较少强调可能影响其医疗决策的患者价值观或偏好。目前的研究调查了病人价值观在能力评估中的作用。方法:110名具有医疗决策能力评估经验的临床医生完成在线调查。参与者阅读了两篇关于一个能力有问题的病人的小短文,并被要求判断病人是否有能力。对于第二个小插曲,参与者被随机分配阅读一个小插曲,其中包含有关患者的长期价值的信息或小插曲没有这些信息。结果:当关于病人的价值观和偏好的信息包括在小插曲中,参与者明显更有可能确定病人有能力做出医疗决定。其他影响临床医生判断的重要因素包括在退伍军人医院进行医疗决策能力评估的经验,以及临床医生是否优先考虑患者的自主权或他们的健康和安全。结论:患者的价值观和偏好是影响临床医师能力判断的重要因素。临床意义:临床医生在进行能力评估时应定期评估患者的价值观和偏好,因为这可能促进患者的自主性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Gerontologist
Clinical Gerontologist GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-PSYCHIATRY
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
25.00%
发文量
90
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Gerontologist presents original research, reviews, and clinical comments relevant to the needs of behavioral health professionals and all practitioners who work with older adults. Published in cooperation with Psychologists in Long Term Care, the journal is designed for psychologists, physicians, nurses, social workers, counselors (family, pastoral, and vocational), and other health professionals who address behavioral health concerns found in later life, including: -adjustments to changing roles- issues related to diversity and aging- family caregiving- spirituality- cognitive and psychosocial assessment- depression, anxiety, and PTSD- Alzheimer’s disease and other neurocognitive disorders- long term care- behavioral medicine in aging- rehabilitation and education for older adults. Each issue provides insightful articles on current topics. Submissions are peer reviewed by content experts and selected for both scholarship and relevance to the practitioner to ensure that the articles are among the best in the field. Authors report original research and conceptual reviews. A unique column in Clinical Gerontologist is “Clinical Comments." This section features brief observations and specific suggestions from practitioners which avoid elaborate research designs or long reference lists. This section is a unique opportunity for you to learn about the valuable clinical work of your peers in a short, concise format.
×
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