建立原住民与托雷斯海峡岛民医疗保健决策的共同决策:混合纱线与修正德尔菲研究

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Marguerite Tracy, David Follent, Emma Webster, Tara Dimopoulos-Bick, Lyndal J. Trevena, Melissa Cawley, Michelle Dickson, Heather L. Shepherd
{"title":"建立原住民与托雷斯海峡岛民医疗保健决策的共同决策:混合纱线与修正德尔菲研究","authors":"Marguerite Tracy,&nbsp;David Follent,&nbsp;Emma Webster,&nbsp;Tara Dimopoulos-Bick,&nbsp;Lyndal J. Trevena,&nbsp;Melissa Cawley,&nbsp;Michelle Dickson,&nbsp;Heather L. Shepherd","doi":"10.1111/hex.70943","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>Shared decision making (SDM) is a process which involves an exchange of information between healthcare professionals and patients about options (including watch and wait) and the patient's preferences. It is recognised as an important part of person-centred health care and is part of national standards for delivery of care in Australia. SDM improves health outcomes and SDM resources specifically designed with and for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are increasingly available. However, there is no culturally appropriate measure to evaluate the SDM process and the impact of these resources. The objective was to create a culturally safe measure of SDM for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities using the nine-item SDM-Q-9 as a starting point.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A purposively invited expert panel of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Professionals and Community members and experts in SDM attended a hybrid yarning briefing session incorporating yarning (a cultural approach to dialogue). The panel then participated in a two round online survey Delphi process. Study team members reviewed the yarning session, developed themes to apply to questions for the Delphi rounds. Team members analysed and reported results of each round to participants and proposed the final measures based on feedback in each round.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Eighteen of 26 invited participants attended the yarning briefing session and 14 participated in both Delphi rounds. Consensus was reached for a measure with 12 items, their wording and the cultural concepts supporting each. The resulting measure included new wording for all items and the addition of three items. From the yarning session the need for a short measure resulted in a proposed five-item version of the measure with the basic aspects of SDM was also agreed on in the Delphi process. Both measures will continue for next stage testing.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Using a hybrid yarning and Delphi method resulted in a culturally adapted measure of SDM. Validation and real-world testing of the measure are planned for the 12- and 5-item version created.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Practice Implications</h3>\n \n <p>Once validated, this co-created culturally responsive measure will be used to assess the efficacy of processes and tools to support shared decision making with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>An Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Governance Group provided oversight and guidance throughout the project, ensuring it was shaped by Indigenous knowledge, cultural protocols, and ethical principles. The Group emphasised reciprocal learning, respect for diverse knowledge systems, and the use of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research methods. It supported community benefit, collaborative cultural approaches, and Indigenous-led decision-making. The Group also ensured findings were prepared and shared in culturally safe ways, recognising knowledge ownership and appropriate dissemination. Additionally, it advised on future directions, strengthening the project's ongoing impact while maintaining alignment with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander values, priorities, and processes. Governance group chairs were observers at the yarning session and no Governance Group members were part of the Delphi process.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55070,"journal":{"name":"Health Expectations","volume":"29 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hex.70943","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Creating a Measure of Shared Decision-Making for Healthcare Decisions With Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People: A Hybrid Yarning and Modified Delphi Study\",\"authors\":\"Marguerite Tracy,&nbsp;David Follent,&nbsp;Emma Webster,&nbsp;Tara Dimopoulos-Bick,&nbsp;Lyndal J. Trevena,&nbsp;Melissa Cawley,&nbsp;Michelle Dickson,&nbsp;Heather L. Shepherd\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/hex.70943\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>Shared decision making (SDM) is a process which involves an exchange of information between healthcare professionals and patients about options (including watch and wait) and the patient's preferences. It is recognised as an important part of person-centred health care and is part of national standards for delivery of care in Australia. SDM improves health outcomes and SDM resources specifically designed with and for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are increasingly available. However, there is no culturally appropriate measure to evaluate the SDM process and the impact of these resources. The objective was to create a culturally safe measure of SDM for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities using the nine-item SDM-Q-9 as a starting point.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A purposively invited expert panel of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Professionals and Community members and experts in SDM attended a hybrid yarning briefing session incorporating yarning (a cultural approach to dialogue). The panel then participated in a two round online survey Delphi process. Study team members reviewed the yarning session, developed themes to apply to questions for the Delphi rounds. Team members analysed and reported results of each round to participants and proposed the final measures based on feedback in each round.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Eighteen of 26 invited participants attended the yarning briefing session and 14 participated in both Delphi rounds. Consensus was reached for a measure with 12 items, their wording and the cultural concepts supporting each. The resulting measure included new wording for all items and the addition of three items. From the yarning session the need for a short measure resulted in a proposed five-item version of the measure with the basic aspects of SDM was also agreed on in the Delphi process. Both measures will continue for next stage testing.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Using a hybrid yarning and Delphi method resulted in a culturally adapted measure of SDM. Validation and real-world testing of the measure are planned for the 12- and 5-item version created.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Practice Implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>Once validated, this co-created culturally responsive measure will be used to assess the efficacy of processes and tools to support shared decision making with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\\n \\n <p>An Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Governance Group provided oversight and guidance throughout the project, ensuring it was shaped by Indigenous knowledge, cultural protocols, and ethical principles. The Group emphasised reciprocal learning, respect for diverse knowledge systems, and the use of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research methods. It supported community benefit, collaborative cultural approaches, and Indigenous-led decision-making. The Group also ensured findings were prepared and shared in culturally safe ways, recognising knowledge ownership and appropriate dissemination. Additionally, it advised on future directions, strengthening the project's ongoing impact while maintaining alignment with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander values, priorities, and processes. Governance group chairs were observers at the yarning session and no Governance Group members were part of the Delphi process.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55070,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Expectations\",\"volume\":\"29 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-10-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hex.70943\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Expectations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70943\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Expectations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70943","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

摘要

共同决策(SDM)是一个过程,涉及医疗保健专业人员和患者之间关于选项(包括观察和等待)和患者偏好的信息交换。它被认为是以人为本的保健的重要组成部分,也是澳大利亚提供保健的国家标准的一部分。可持续发展机制改善了健康结果,为土著和托雷斯海峡岛民社区专门设计的可持续发展机制资源越来越多。然而,没有文化上合适的措施来评估SDM过程和这些资源的影响。本研究以九项SDM- q -9为出发点,为原住民和托雷斯海峡岛民及社区建立一个文化安全的SDM衡量标准。方法有目的邀请土著和托雷斯海峡岛民卫生专业人员、社区成员和SDM专家组成的专家小组参加了一个混合纱线说明会,其中包括纱线(一种文化对话方法)。然后,该小组参与了两轮在线调查德尔菲过程。研究小组成员回顾了纱线会议,制定了适用于德尔菲回合问题的主题。团队成员分析并向参与者报告每一轮的结果,并根据每一轮的反馈提出最终的措施。结果26名受邀参与者中有18人参加了纱线说明会,14人参加了两轮德尔菲。会议就包含12个项目的措施及其措辞和支持每一项目的文化概念达成了共识。最终的措施包括所有项目的新措辞,并增加了三个项目。在总结会议上,由于需要一项短期措施,因此在德尔菲过程中也就拟议的五项措施版本达成了一致意见,其中包括SDM的基本方面。这两项措施将继续进行下一阶段的测试。结论采用混合纱线法和德尔菲法对SDM进行了文化适应性测量。计划在创建的12项和5项版本中对该措施进行验证和实际测试。实践启示一旦得到验证,这一共同创建的文化响应措施将用于评估流程和工具的有效性,以支持与土著和托雷斯海峡岛民的共同决策。一个土著和托雷斯海峡岛民治理小组在整个项目中提供监督和指导,确保项目符合土著知识、文化协议和道德原则。该小组强调相互学习,尊重不同的知识体系,以及使用土著和托雷斯海峡岛民的研究方法。它支持社区利益、协作文化方法和土著主导的决策。该小组还确保以文化安全的方式准备和分享调查结果,承认知识所有权和适当传播。此外,它还就未来的方向提出建议,加强项目的持续影响,同时保持与土著和托雷斯海峡岛民的价值观、优先事项和流程的一致性。治理小组主席是会议的观察员,没有治理小组成员是德尔菲过程的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Creating a Measure of Shared Decision-Making for Healthcare Decisions With Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People: A Hybrid Yarning and Modified Delphi Study

Objectives

Shared decision making (SDM) is a process which involves an exchange of information between healthcare professionals and patients about options (including watch and wait) and the patient's preferences. It is recognised as an important part of person-centred health care and is part of national standards for delivery of care in Australia. SDM improves health outcomes and SDM resources specifically designed with and for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are increasingly available. However, there is no culturally appropriate measure to evaluate the SDM process and the impact of these resources. The objective was to create a culturally safe measure of SDM for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities using the nine-item SDM-Q-9 as a starting point.

Methods

A purposively invited expert panel of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Professionals and Community members and experts in SDM attended a hybrid yarning briefing session incorporating yarning (a cultural approach to dialogue). The panel then participated in a two round online survey Delphi process. Study team members reviewed the yarning session, developed themes to apply to questions for the Delphi rounds. Team members analysed and reported results of each round to participants and proposed the final measures based on feedback in each round.

Results

Eighteen of 26 invited participants attended the yarning briefing session and 14 participated in both Delphi rounds. Consensus was reached for a measure with 12 items, their wording and the cultural concepts supporting each. The resulting measure included new wording for all items and the addition of three items. From the yarning session the need for a short measure resulted in a proposed five-item version of the measure with the basic aspects of SDM was also agreed on in the Delphi process. Both measures will continue for next stage testing.

Conclusions

Using a hybrid yarning and Delphi method resulted in a culturally adapted measure of SDM. Validation and real-world testing of the measure are planned for the 12- and 5-item version created.

Practice Implications

Once validated, this co-created culturally responsive measure will be used to assess the efficacy of processes and tools to support shared decision making with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Patient or Public Contribution

An Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Governance Group provided oversight and guidance throughout the project, ensuring it was shaped by Indigenous knowledge, cultural protocols, and ethical principles. The Group emphasised reciprocal learning, respect for diverse knowledge systems, and the use of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research methods. It supported community benefit, collaborative cultural approaches, and Indigenous-led decision-making. The Group also ensured findings were prepared and shared in culturally safe ways, recognising knowledge ownership and appropriate dissemination. Additionally, it advised on future directions, strengthening the project's ongoing impact while maintaining alignment with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander values, priorities, and processes. Governance group chairs were observers at the yarning session and no Governance Group members were part of the Delphi process.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Expectations
Health Expectations 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
9.40%
发文量
251
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Expectations promotes critical thinking and informed debate about all aspects of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health and social care, health policy and health services research including: • Person-centred care and quality improvement • Patients'' participation in decisions about disease prevention and management • Public perceptions of health services • Citizen involvement in health care policy making and priority-setting • Methods for monitoring and evaluating participation • Empowerment and consumerism • Patients'' role in safety and quality • Patient and public role in health services research • Co-production (researchers working with patients and the public) of research, health care and policy Health Expectations is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles and critical commentaries. It includes papers which clarify concepts, develop theories, and critically analyse and evaluate specific policies and practices. The Journal provides an inter-disciplinary and international forum in which researchers (including PPIE researchers) from a range of backgrounds and expertise can present their work to other researchers, policy-makers, health care professionals, managers, patients and consumer advocates.
×
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
小红书