Clinical Notes Contain Limited Documentation of Shared Decision Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening Decisions.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Brittney Mancini, Joshua Siar, Kathrene Diane Valentine, Leigh Simmons, Lauren Leavitt, Karen Sepucha
{"title":"Clinical Notes Contain Limited Documentation of Shared Decision Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening Decisions.","authors":"Brittney Mancini, Joshua Siar, Kathrene Diane Valentine, Leigh Simmons, Lauren Leavitt, Karen Sepucha","doi":"10.1177/0272989X251340704","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundEffective shared decision making (SDM) in health care involves thorough discussions of options, pros, cons, and patient preferences. While SDM is recommended for engaging adults aged 76 to 85 y in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decisions, the extent of SDM documentation in clinical notes remains unclear.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the current state of SDM documentation in clinical notes regarding CRC screening discussions for adults aged 76 to 85 y. It also sought to assess the impact of an SDM training intervention on documentation quality and compare documented SDM elements with physician- and patient-reported SDM.MethodsData from 465 patient participants and 58 primary care physicians in a multisite cluster randomized trial were analyzed. Physicians in the intervention arm underwent a 2-h SDM skills training and received support tools, including an electronic health record SmartPhrase. Coders analyzed clinical notes using content analysis to identify SDM elements. Linear multilevel models and multilevel partial correlations were used for analysis.ResultsOverall, SDM Note scores were low (<math><mrow><mover><mrow><mi>x</mi></mrow><mo>¯</mo></mover></mrow></math> = 0.80, <i>s</i> = 0.99). The intervention arm exhibited higher SDM Note scores than the comparator arm did (adjusted mean 1.02 v. 0.66; <i>P</i> = 0.006), with more frequent documentation of stool-based tests (52% v. 33%; <i>P</i> = 0.02) and colonoscopy cons (28% v. 8%; <i>P</i> = 0.001). No significant differences were observed in patient preference documentation. SDM Note scores correlated moderately with patient- and physician-reported SDM.ConclusionDocumentation of CRC screening discussions with older adults lacks comprehensive SDM elements. The intervention improved SDM documentation, particularly regarding alternative screening options and potential cons. Given the limited documentation of SDM even after a training intervention, attention to more robust SDM documentation, including patient preferences and discussion of stopping CRC screening, is needed.HighlightsShared decision-making (SDM) documentation in clinical notes is limited for discussions on colon cancer screening among older adults.SDM training improves SDM documentation of screening options for colorectal cancer, specifically documentation of stool-based testing and the downsides of screening options.SDM documentation in clinical notes is related to patient and provider reports of SDM.</p>","PeriodicalId":49839,"journal":{"name":"Medical Decision Making","volume":" ","pages":"272989X251340704"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X251340704","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

BackgroundEffective shared decision making (SDM) in health care involves thorough discussions of options, pros, cons, and patient preferences. While SDM is recommended for engaging adults aged 76 to 85 y in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decisions, the extent of SDM documentation in clinical notes remains unclear.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the current state of SDM documentation in clinical notes regarding CRC screening discussions for adults aged 76 to 85 y. It also sought to assess the impact of an SDM training intervention on documentation quality and compare documented SDM elements with physician- and patient-reported SDM.MethodsData from 465 patient participants and 58 primary care physicians in a multisite cluster randomized trial were analyzed. Physicians in the intervention arm underwent a 2-h SDM skills training and received support tools, including an electronic health record SmartPhrase. Coders analyzed clinical notes using content analysis to identify SDM elements. Linear multilevel models and multilevel partial correlations were used for analysis.ResultsOverall, SDM Note scores were low (x¯ = 0.80, s = 0.99). The intervention arm exhibited higher SDM Note scores than the comparator arm did (adjusted mean 1.02 v. 0.66; P = 0.006), with more frequent documentation of stool-based tests (52% v. 33%; P = 0.02) and colonoscopy cons (28% v. 8%; P = 0.001). No significant differences were observed in patient preference documentation. SDM Note scores correlated moderately with patient- and physician-reported SDM.ConclusionDocumentation of CRC screening discussions with older adults lacks comprehensive SDM elements. The intervention improved SDM documentation, particularly regarding alternative screening options and potential cons. Given the limited documentation of SDM even after a training intervention, attention to more robust SDM documentation, including patient preferences and discussion of stopping CRC screening, is needed.HighlightsShared decision-making (SDM) documentation in clinical notes is limited for discussions on colon cancer screening among older adults.SDM training improves SDM documentation of screening options for colorectal cancer, specifically documentation of stool-based testing and the downsides of screening options.SDM documentation in clinical notes is related to patient and provider reports of SDM.

临床记录包含有限的文件共同决策的大肠癌筛查决策。
在医疗保健中,有效的共享决策(SDM)包括对各种选择、利弊和患者偏好的全面讨论。虽然SDM被推荐用于76至85岁的成年人参与结直肠癌(CRC)筛查决策,但临床记录中SDM记录的程度尚不清楚。本研究旨在评估76 - 85岁成人CRC筛查讨论的临床记录中SDM文件的现状。它还试图评估SDM培训干预对文件质量的影响,并将记录的SDM元素与医生和患者报告的SDM进行比较。方法对来自465名患者和58名初级保健医生的数据进行分析。干预组的医生接受了为期2小时的SDM技能培训,并接受了支持工具,包括电子健康记录SmartPhrase。编码员使用内容分析来分析临床记录,以识别SDM元素。采用线性多水平模型和多水平偏相关进行分析。结果总体而言,SDM Note评分较低(x¯= 0.80,s = 0.99)。干预组的SDM评分高于对照组(调整平均1.02 vs . 0.66;P = 0.006),以粪便为基础的检查记录更频繁(52% vs . 33%;P = 0.02)和结肠镜检查对照组(28% vs . 8%;P = 0.001)。在患者偏好记录中没有观察到显著差异。SDM笔记评分与患者和医生报告的SDM有中度相关。结论关于老年人CRC筛查讨论的文献缺乏全面的SDM要素。干预措施改善了SDM文件,特别是关于替代筛查选择和潜在缺点的文件。考虑到即使在培训干预后,SDM文件也有限,需要关注更强大的SDM文件,包括患者偏好和停止CRC筛查的讨论。临床记录中的共同决策(SDM)文件在讨论老年人结肠癌筛查时是有限的。SDM培训改进了结肠直肠癌筛查方案的SDM文档,特别是基于粪便的检测和筛查方案的缺点的文档。临床记录中的SDM文件与患者和提供者的SDM报告有关。
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
Medical Decision Making
Medical Decision Making 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
146
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Decision Making offers rigorous and systematic approaches to decision making that are designed to improve the health and clinical care of individuals and to assist with health care policy development. Using the fundamentals of decision analysis and theory, economic evaluation, and evidence based quality assessment, Medical Decision Making presents both theoretical and practical statistical and modeling techniques and methods from a variety of disciplines.
×
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