{"title":"共同决策在改善患者体验中的作用:来自头颈部癌症治愈患者群组的启示。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.radi.2024.07.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Shared decision-making (SDM) is on the NHS policy agenda, and the preferred model for preference-sensitive decisions. This study establishes baseline patient-perceived SDM in a radical head and neck cohort, and explores patients’ views on SDM in a large, specialist trust.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An SDM questionnaire was distributed to all radical head and neck radiotherapy patients (N = 165), June–December 2023. This combined a well-validated instrument for measuring SDM from the patient perspective, SDM-Q-9, with additional questions exploring patient views. Thematic analysis was used to construct and interpret themes.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>65/165 (39%) questionnaires were returned. SDM-Q-9 mean standardised score was 78.6 (SD 26.3). There was a moderate ceiling effect (26%). Scores were not sensitive to sex (p = 0.64) or age (ρ = 0.1). Higher levels of SDM were perceived by participants who stated SDM was very important (51/65, 79%) than somewhat or not at all important (82.4 vs. 62.7; p = 0.02; Cohen d = 0.75). Individuals who discussed their personal priorities with the clinician (46/65, 70.8%), were more likely to be very satisfied with their involvement in SDM (89.1% vs. 52.9%). Thematic analysis generated three themes: Control, Desire for Transparency and Understanding, and Doctor as the Expert.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Patient-perceived SDM levels are high for head and neck patients. Participants who value SDM also perceive higher levels of SDM. Patient satisfaction increases when individuals discuss their personal priorities. The modest response rate and self-selection bias affect the generalisability of the results. Only radiotherapy patients were included; those who chose alternative treatment may perceive different levels of SDM. The moderate ceiling effect may limit the use of SDM-Q-9 to measure impact of future interventions to improve SDM.</p></div><div><h3>Implications for practice</h3><p>SDM-Q-9 should be combined with an objective, observer measure of SDM.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47416,"journal":{"name":"Radiography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of shared decision-making in enhancing patient experience: Insights from a cohort of curative head and neck cancer patients\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.radi.2024.07.020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Shared decision-making (SDM) is on the NHS policy agenda, and the preferred model for preference-sensitive decisions. This study establishes baseline patient-perceived SDM in a radical head and neck cohort, and explores patients’ views on SDM in a large, specialist trust.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An SDM questionnaire was distributed to all radical head and neck radiotherapy patients (N = 165), June–December 2023. This combined a well-validated instrument for measuring SDM from the patient perspective, SDM-Q-9, with additional questions exploring patient views. Thematic analysis was used to construct and interpret themes.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>65/165 (39%) questionnaires were returned. SDM-Q-9 mean standardised score was 78.6 (SD 26.3). There was a moderate ceiling effect (26%). Scores were not sensitive to sex (p = 0.64) or age (ρ = 0.1). Higher levels of SDM were perceived by participants who stated SDM was very important (51/65, 79%) than somewhat or not at all important (82.4 vs. 62.7; p = 0.02; Cohen d = 0.75). Individuals who discussed their personal priorities with the clinician (46/65, 70.8%), were more likely to be very satisfied with their involvement in SDM (89.1% vs. 52.9%). Thematic analysis generated three themes: Control, Desire for Transparency and Understanding, and Doctor as the Expert.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Patient-perceived SDM levels are high for head and neck patients. Participants who value SDM also perceive higher levels of SDM. Patient satisfaction increases when individuals discuss their personal priorities. The modest response rate and self-selection bias affect the generalisability of the results. Only radiotherapy patients were included; those who chose alternative treatment may perceive different levels of SDM. The moderate ceiling effect may limit the use of SDM-Q-9 to measure impact of future interventions to improve SDM.</p></div><div><h3>Implications for practice</h3><p>SDM-Q-9 should be combined with an objective, observer measure of SDM.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47416,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiography\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817424001949\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817424001949","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
The role of shared decision-making in enhancing patient experience: Insights from a cohort of curative head and neck cancer patients
Introduction
Shared decision-making (SDM) is on the NHS policy agenda, and the preferred model for preference-sensitive decisions. This study establishes baseline patient-perceived SDM in a radical head and neck cohort, and explores patients’ views on SDM in a large, specialist trust.
Methods
An SDM questionnaire was distributed to all radical head and neck radiotherapy patients (N = 165), June–December 2023. This combined a well-validated instrument for measuring SDM from the patient perspective, SDM-Q-9, with additional questions exploring patient views. Thematic analysis was used to construct and interpret themes.
Results
65/165 (39%) questionnaires were returned. SDM-Q-9 mean standardised score was 78.6 (SD 26.3). There was a moderate ceiling effect (26%). Scores were not sensitive to sex (p = 0.64) or age (ρ = 0.1). Higher levels of SDM were perceived by participants who stated SDM was very important (51/65, 79%) than somewhat or not at all important (82.4 vs. 62.7; p = 0.02; Cohen d = 0.75). Individuals who discussed their personal priorities with the clinician (46/65, 70.8%), were more likely to be very satisfied with their involvement in SDM (89.1% vs. 52.9%). Thematic analysis generated three themes: Control, Desire for Transparency and Understanding, and Doctor as the Expert.
Conclusion
Patient-perceived SDM levels are high for head and neck patients. Participants who value SDM also perceive higher levels of SDM. Patient satisfaction increases when individuals discuss their personal priorities. The modest response rate and self-selection bias affect the generalisability of the results. Only radiotherapy patients were included; those who chose alternative treatment may perceive different levels of SDM. The moderate ceiling effect may limit the use of SDM-Q-9 to measure impact of future interventions to improve SDM.
Implications for practice
SDM-Q-9 should be combined with an objective, observer measure of SDM.
RadiographyRADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
34.60%
发文量
169
审稿时长
63 days
期刊介绍:
Radiography is an International, English language, peer-reviewed journal of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy. Radiography is the official professional journal of the College of Radiographers and is published quarterly. Radiography aims to publish the highest quality material, both clinical and scientific, on all aspects of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy and oncology.