Health care professionals' experiences and perceptions of making treatment decisions for older adults with memory loss: a qualitative systematic review.

IF 4.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Kimberly Shapkin, Karen MacKinnon, Esther Sangster-Gormley, Bernadette Zakher, Lorelei Newton, Jayna Holroyd-Leduc
{"title":"Health care professionals' experiences and perceptions of making treatment decisions for older adults with memory loss: a qualitative systematic review.","authors":"Kimberly Shapkin, Karen MacKinnon, Esther Sangster-Gormley, Bernadette Zakher, Lorelei Newton, Jayna Holroyd-Leduc","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-23-00486","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review aimed to appraise and synthesize evidence about licensed health care professionals' experiences and perceptions of treatment decision-making affecting older people with memory loss and comorbid conditions.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Treatment decision-making affecting older people with memory loss and comorbid conditions presents significant challenges for health care professionals as existing clinical practice guidelines and health care services are designed to focus on managing single-disease conditions. The complexity of balancing comorbid conditions, in addition to memory loss, has led to increased research in this area. Given the growing body of literature exploring health care professionals' decision-making, a synthesis of this evidence is needed to provide clearer insights and inform practice.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria: </strong>This review considered qualitative studies that explored licensed health care professionals' treatment decisions when providing care for older people (over 65 years) living with memory loss and comorbid conditions. We considered studies conducted across community and clinical settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 3-step search strategy was used in May 2022 to identify published and unpublished studies across the CINAHL (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), Scopus, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (ProQuest). Additionally, relevant websites were searched using keywords to identify gray literature. Searches covered all available literature from database inception using a combination of controlled vocabulary (MeSH and CINAHL headings) and keywords to capture qualitative studies, with an updated search conducted in June 2023. Two independent reviewers completed the title/abstract and full-text screening, critical appraisal, data extraction, and data synthesis. Findings classified as unequivocal or credible were grouped into categories that were synthesized to generate a comprehensive set of findings. The ConQual approach was applied to assess confidence in qualitative research synthesis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen studies published between 2006 and 2022 met the eligibility criteria. A total of 76 findings were extracted and grouped into 8 categories. Three synthesized findings were assembled from the findings: i) Health care professionals experience uncertainty and perceive older people with memory loss in ways that influence their treatment decision-making; ii) Communication challenges and contextual factors unique to older persons, families, and health service organizations influences health care professionals' treatment decision-making affecting older people with memory loss and comorbid conditions; and iii) health care professionals identify processes to support safeguarding older people with memory loss in treatment decision-making.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Health care professionals' treatment decision-making practices varied across medical specialties, with similarities spanning clinical settings. Health care professionals were committed to ensuring that older patients with memory loss and comorbid conditions received treatment to enhance their quality of life while promoting safe and ethical care. However, they held assumptions about these patients' abilities, viewed communication as challenging, and did not always have a clear understanding of patient preferences. This review identified that health care professionals who care for this population require further education. Changes to health care professionals' treatment decision-making are needed to ensure that older people and their family members are actively engaged in the processes of shared decision-making, which will support a person- and family-centered care approach.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42021271485.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBI evidence synthesis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-23-00486","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This systematic review aimed to appraise and synthesize evidence about licensed health care professionals' experiences and perceptions of treatment decision-making affecting older people with memory loss and comorbid conditions.

Introduction: Treatment decision-making affecting older people with memory loss and comorbid conditions presents significant challenges for health care professionals as existing clinical practice guidelines and health care services are designed to focus on managing single-disease conditions. The complexity of balancing comorbid conditions, in addition to memory loss, has led to increased research in this area. Given the growing body of literature exploring health care professionals' decision-making, a synthesis of this evidence is needed to provide clearer insights and inform practice.

Eligibility criteria: This review considered qualitative studies that explored licensed health care professionals' treatment decisions when providing care for older people (over 65 years) living with memory loss and comorbid conditions. We considered studies conducted across community and clinical settings.

Methods: A 3-step search strategy was used in May 2022 to identify published and unpublished studies across the CINAHL (EBSCOhost), MEDLINE (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), Scopus, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (ProQuest). Additionally, relevant websites were searched using keywords to identify gray literature. Searches covered all available literature from database inception using a combination of controlled vocabulary (MeSH and CINAHL headings) and keywords to capture qualitative studies, with an updated search conducted in June 2023. Two independent reviewers completed the title/abstract and full-text screening, critical appraisal, data extraction, and data synthesis. Findings classified as unequivocal or credible were grouped into categories that were synthesized to generate a comprehensive set of findings. The ConQual approach was applied to assess confidence in qualitative research synthesis.

Results: Fourteen studies published between 2006 and 2022 met the eligibility criteria. A total of 76 findings were extracted and grouped into 8 categories. Three synthesized findings were assembled from the findings: i) Health care professionals experience uncertainty and perceive older people with memory loss in ways that influence their treatment decision-making; ii) Communication challenges and contextual factors unique to older persons, families, and health service organizations influences health care professionals' treatment decision-making affecting older people with memory loss and comorbid conditions; and iii) health care professionals identify processes to support safeguarding older people with memory loss in treatment decision-making.

Conclusions: Health care professionals' treatment decision-making practices varied across medical specialties, with similarities spanning clinical settings. Health care professionals were committed to ensuring that older patients with memory loss and comorbid conditions received treatment to enhance their quality of life while promoting safe and ethical care. However, they held assumptions about these patients' abilities, viewed communication as challenging, and did not always have a clear understanding of patient preferences. This review identified that health care professionals who care for this population require further education. Changes to health care professionals' treatment decision-making are needed to ensure that older people and their family members are actively engaged in the processes of shared decision-making, which will support a person- and family-centered care approach.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42021271485.

卫生保健专业人员的经验和看法,作出治疗决策的老年人记忆丧失:定性系统回顾。
目的:本系统综述旨在评价和综合有关执业卫生保健专业人员对影响老年人记忆丧失和合并症的治疗决策的经验和看法的证据。导言:影响老年人记忆丧失和合并症的治疗决策对卫生保健专业人员提出了重大挑战,因为现有的临床实践指南和卫生保健服务旨在集中于管理单一疾病条件。除了记忆丧失之外,平衡共病条件的复杂性导致了这一领域的研究增加。鉴于研究卫生保健专业人员决策的文献越来越多,需要对这些证据进行综合,以提供更清晰的见解并为实践提供信息。资格标准:本综述考虑了定性研究,探讨了执业卫生保健专业人员在为患有记忆丧失和合并症的老年人(65岁以上)提供护理时的治疗决策。我们考虑了在社区和临床环境中进行的研究。方法:采用三步搜索策略,于2022年5月在CINAHL (EBSCOhost)、MEDLINE (EBSCOhost)、PsycINFO (EBSCOhost)、Scopus和ProQuest博士论文和论文(ProQuest)中识别已发表和未发表的研究。并利用关键词搜索相关网站,识别灰色文献。搜索涵盖了数据库建立以来所有可用的文献,使用受控词汇(MeSH和CINAHL标题)和关键词的组合来捕获定性研究,并于2023年6月进行了更新搜索。两位独立审稿人完成了标题/摘要和全文筛选、批判性评估、数据提取和数据合成。归类为明确或可信的调查结果被归类为综合的类别,以产生一套全面的调查结果。采用征服方法评估定性研究综合的信心。结果:2006年至2022年间发表的14项研究符合资格标准。共提取76项发现,并将其分为8类。从调查结果中得出了三个综合结论:i)医疗保健专业人员经历不确定性并以影响其治疗决策的方式看待失忆老年人;㈡老年人、家庭和卫生服务组织特有的沟通挑战和环境因素影响到卫生保健专业人员对患有记忆丧失和合并症的老年人的治疗决策;卫生保健专业人员确定在治疗决策中支持保护失忆老年人的程序。结论:卫生保健专业人员的治疗决策实践因医学专业而异,在临床环境中具有相似性。保健专业人员致力于确保患有记忆丧失和合并症的老年患者得到治疗,以提高他们的生活质量,同时促进安全和合乎道德的护理。然而,他们对这些患者的能力持有假设,认为沟通具有挑战性,并且并不总是清楚地了解患者的偏好。这篇综述指出,照顾这一人群的卫生保健专业人员需要进一步的教育。需要改变保健专业人员的治疗决策,以确保老年人及其家庭成员积极参与共同决策的进程,这将支持以个人和家庭为中心的护理方法。评审注册:PROSPERO CRD42021271485。
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
JBI evidence synthesis
JBI evidence synthesis Nursing-Nursing (all)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
218
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信