Patient experiences in making PTSD treatment decisions.

IF 1.9 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Psychological Services Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-19 DOI:10.1037/ser0000817
Sadie E Larsen, Katinka Hooyer, Shannon M Kehle-Forbes, Jessica Hamblen
{"title":"Patient experiences in making PTSD treatment decisions.","authors":"Sadie E Larsen, Katinka Hooyer, Shannon M Kehle-Forbes, Jessica Hamblen","doi":"10.1037/ser0000817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although there is a range of effective posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatments, the number of patients who receive those treatments is disappointingly low (Finley et al., 2015; Maguen et al., 2018). Very little research has examined the patient experience of deciding on a PTSD treatment option and how that experience influences treatment preference and selection. In a sample of 12 veterans and 10 providers, we recorded the sessions in which providers discussed PTSD treatment options with their patients and then interviewed patients to ask their impressions of those same sessions. Specifically, using qualitative analysis, we sought to understand (a) patient preferences and experiences of choosing a PTSD treatment option, (b) what information patients retain from treatment planning sessions, and (c) why patients chose a given treatment. Almost all the patients in this sample chose an evidence-based psychotherapy but could remember little about the options afterward. Patients reported that providers presented options neutrally and that they made shared decisions with their providers. Most could talk through their reasons for coming to a decision and felt comfortable with the decision, but decisions were often made heuristically rather than deliberatively. Surprisingly, a few patients had a hard time explaining why they chose a specific treatment, were not conscious of their exact reasons for choosing a treatment, or seemed unable to remember why they chose a treatment. We also noticed subtle ways in which providers' discussions influenced treatment choice. Implications for practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20749,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Services","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11026293/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Services","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000817","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although there is a range of effective posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatments, the number of patients who receive those treatments is disappointingly low (Finley et al., 2015; Maguen et al., 2018). Very little research has examined the patient experience of deciding on a PTSD treatment option and how that experience influences treatment preference and selection. In a sample of 12 veterans and 10 providers, we recorded the sessions in which providers discussed PTSD treatment options with their patients and then interviewed patients to ask their impressions of those same sessions. Specifically, using qualitative analysis, we sought to understand (a) patient preferences and experiences of choosing a PTSD treatment option, (b) what information patients retain from treatment planning sessions, and (c) why patients chose a given treatment. Almost all the patients in this sample chose an evidence-based psychotherapy but could remember little about the options afterward. Patients reported that providers presented options neutrally and that they made shared decisions with their providers. Most could talk through their reasons for coming to a decision and felt comfortable with the decision, but decisions were often made heuristically rather than deliberatively. Surprisingly, a few patients had a hard time explaining why they chose a specific treatment, were not conscious of their exact reasons for choosing a treatment, or seemed unable to remember why they chose a treatment. We also noticed subtle ways in which providers' discussions influenced treatment choice. Implications for practice are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

患者在创伤后应激障碍治疗决策方面的经验。
尽管有一系列有效的创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)治疗方法,但接受这些治疗的患者数量低得令人失望(Finley等人,2015;Maguen等人,2018)。很少有研究考察患者决定创伤后应激障碍治疗方案的经历,以及这种经历如何影响治疗偏好和选择。在12名退伍军人和10名提供者的样本中,我们记录了提供者与患者讨论创伤后应激障碍治疗方案的会议,然后采访患者,询问他们对这些会议的印象。具体而言,通过定性分析,我们试图了解(a)患者选择创伤后应激障碍治疗方案的偏好和经历,(b)患者从治疗计划会议中保留了哪些信息,以及(c)患者为什么选择特定的治疗。该样本中几乎所有的患者都选择了循证心理治疗,但对之后的选择几乎记不清了。患者报告说,提供者中立地提出了选择,他们与提供者共同做出了决定。大多数人都能说出自己做出决定的原因,并对这个决定感到满意,但做出决定往往是试探性的,而不是深思熟虑的。令人惊讶的是,一些患者很难解释他们为什么选择特定的治疗方法,不知道自己选择治疗的确切原因,或者似乎记不起自己为什么选择治疗。我们还注意到,提供者的讨论对治疗选择产生了微妙的影响。讨论了对实践的启示。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
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
Psychological Services
Psychological Services PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
13.00%
发文量
216
期刊介绍: Psychological Services publishes high-quality data-based articles on the broad range of psychological services. While the Division"s focus is on psychologists in "public service," usually defined as being employed by a governmental agency, Psychological Services covers the full range of psychological services provided in any service delivery setting. Psychological Services encourages submission of papers that focus on broad issues related to psychotherapy outcomes, evaluations of psychological service programs and systems, and public policy analyses.
×
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