Shared Decision Making in Practice and the Perspectives of Health Care Professionals on Video-Recorded Consultations With Patients With Low Health Literacy in the Palliative Phase of Their Disease.

IF 1.7
MDM policy & practice Pub Date : 2021-07-02 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23814683211023472
Ruud T J Roodbeen, Janneke Noordman, Gudule Boland, Sandra van Dulmen
{"title":"Shared Decision Making in Practice and the Perspectives of Health Care Professionals on Video-Recorded Consultations With Patients With Low Health Literacy in the Palliative Phase of Their Disease.","authors":"Ruud T J Roodbeen,&nbsp;Janneke Noordman,&nbsp;Gudule Boland,&nbsp;Sandra van Dulmen","doi":"10.1177/23814683211023472","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction.</b> An important goal of palliative care is improving the quality of life of patients and their partners/families. To attain this goal, requirements and preferences of patients need to be discussed, preferably through shared decision making (SDM). This enhances patient autonomy and patient-centeredness, requiring active participation by patients. This is demanding for palliative patients, and even more so for patients with limited health literacy (LHL). This study aimed to examine SDM in practice and assess health care professionals' perspectives on their own SDM. <b>Methods.</b> An explanatory sequential mixed methods design was used. Video recordings were gathered cross-sectionally of palliative care consultations with LHL patients (<i>n</i> = 36) conducted by specialized palliative care clinicians and professionals integrating a palliative approach. The consultations were observed for SDM using the OPTION<sup>5</sup> instrument. Potential determinants of SDM were examined using multilevel analysis. Sequentially, stimulated recall interviews were conducted assessing the perspectives of professionals on their SDM (<i>n</i> = 19). Interviews were examined using deductive thematic content analysis. <b>Results.</b> The average SDM score in practice was moderate, varying greatly between professionals, as shown by the multilevel analysis and by varying degrees of perceived patient involvement in SDM mentioned in the interviews. To improve this, professionals recommended 1) continuously discussing all options with patients, 2) allowing time for patients to talk, and 3) using strategic timing for involving patients in SDM. <b>Discussion.</b> The implementation of SDM for people with LHL in palliative care varies in quality and needs improvement. SDM needs to be enhanced in this care domain because decisions are complex and demanding for LHL patients. Future research is needed that focuses on supporting strategies for comprehensible SDM, best practices, and organizational adaptations.</p>","PeriodicalId":520707,"journal":{"name":"MDM policy & practice","volume":" ","pages":"23814683211023472"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/23814683211023472","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MDM policy & practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683211023472","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Introduction. An important goal of palliative care is improving the quality of life of patients and their partners/families. To attain this goal, requirements and preferences of patients need to be discussed, preferably through shared decision making (SDM). This enhances patient autonomy and patient-centeredness, requiring active participation by patients. This is demanding for palliative patients, and even more so for patients with limited health literacy (LHL). This study aimed to examine SDM in practice and assess health care professionals' perspectives on their own SDM. Methods. An explanatory sequential mixed methods design was used. Video recordings were gathered cross-sectionally of palliative care consultations with LHL patients (n = 36) conducted by specialized palliative care clinicians and professionals integrating a palliative approach. The consultations were observed for SDM using the OPTION5 instrument. Potential determinants of SDM were examined using multilevel analysis. Sequentially, stimulated recall interviews were conducted assessing the perspectives of professionals on their SDM (n = 19). Interviews were examined using deductive thematic content analysis. Results. The average SDM score in practice was moderate, varying greatly between professionals, as shown by the multilevel analysis and by varying degrees of perceived patient involvement in SDM mentioned in the interviews. To improve this, professionals recommended 1) continuously discussing all options with patients, 2) allowing time for patients to talk, and 3) using strategic timing for involving patients in SDM. Discussion. The implementation of SDM for people with LHL in palliative care varies in quality and needs improvement. SDM needs to be enhanced in this care domain because decisions are complex and demanding for LHL patients. Future research is needed that focuses on supporting strategies for comprehensible SDM, best practices, and organizational adaptations.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

实践中的共同决策和卫生保健专业人员在与疾病缓和期低健康素养患者的录像咨询中的观点。
介绍。姑息治疗的一个重要目标是改善患者及其伴侣/家庭的生活质量。为了实现这一目标,需要讨论患者的需求和偏好,最好是通过共同决策(SDM)。这增强了患者的自主性和以患者为中心,需要患者积极参与。这对姑息治疗患者要求很高,对健康知识有限的患者更是如此。本研究旨在检验SDM在实践中的应用,并评估卫生保健专业人员对自身SDM的看法。方法。采用解释性序列混合方法设计。我们收集了由专门的姑息治疗临床医生和整合姑息治疗方法的专业人员对LHL患者(n = 36)进行的姑息治疗咨询的横截面视频记录。使用OPTION5工具观察SDM的磋商情况。使用多水平分析检查SDM的潜在决定因素。随后,进行了刺激回忆访谈,评估专业人员对其SDM的看法(n = 19)。访谈采用演绎主题内容分析进行检验。结果。实践中SDM的平均得分为中等,专业人员之间的差异很大,这可以从多水平分析和访谈中提到的不同程度的患者参与SDM的感知中看出。为了改善这一点,专业人士建议:1)不断地与患者讨论所有的选择,2)给患者时间交谈,3)利用战略时机让患者参与SDM。讨论。姑息治疗中对LHL患者实施SDM的质量参差不齐,需要改进。SDM需要在这一护理领域得到加强,因为对于LHL患者来说,决策非常复杂且要求很高。未来的研究需要集中在支持可理解的SDM、最佳实践和组织适应的策略上。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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