癌症年轻女性与治疗决策:对患者参与和授权的反思

K. Snyder, Alexandra Tate, E. Roubenoff
{"title":"癌症年轻女性与治疗决策:对患者参与和授权的反思","authors":"K. Snyder, Alexandra Tate, E. Roubenoff","doi":"10.1108/S0275-495920180000036002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract \nPurpose \nEncouraging patient involvement is a cornerstone of many healthcare interventions and decision-making models to ensure that treatment decisions reflect the needs, values, and desires of patients. Involved patients are thought to be empowered patients who feel a sense of efficacy in regards to their own health. However, there is a lack of understanding of how patients relate to empowerment and involvement and, most importantly, how these constructs relate to one another in patients’ decision-making experiences. \n \n \nMethodology/approach \nThrough an inductive analysis, this chapter draws on qualitative interviews of women diagnosed with breast cancer prior to 40 years of age (n = 69). \n \n \nFindings \nBy examining the intersection of how patients define their own involvement in treatment decisions and their sense of empowerment, we find four orientations to decision-making (Advocates, Bystanders, Co-Pilots, and Downplayers) with involvement and empowerment being coupled for some respondents, but decoupled for others. \n \n \nResearch limitations/implications \nOur findings suggest expanding what it means to be an “active” patient as respondents had multiple ways of characterizing involvement, including being informed or following their doctor’s advice. Our findings also suggest a more critical examination of the origins and potential downsides of patient empowerment as some respondents reported feeling overwhelmed or pushed into advocacy roles. The sample was disproportionately higher socioeconomic status with limited racial/ethnic diversity. Empowerment and involvement may be enacted differently for other social groups and other medical conditions. \n \n \nOriginality/value \nBy examining first-person patient narratives, we conclude that patients’ experience may not fully align with current academic or clinical discussions of patient involvement or empowerment.","PeriodicalId":74681,"journal":{"name":"Research in the sociology of health care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/S0275-495920180000036002","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Younger Women with Breast Cancer and Treatment Decision-Making: Rethinking Patient Involvement and Empowerment\",\"authors\":\"K. Snyder, Alexandra Tate, E. Roubenoff\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/S0275-495920180000036002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract \\nPurpose \\nEncouraging patient involvement is a cornerstone of many healthcare interventions and decision-making models to ensure that treatment decisions reflect the needs, values, and desires of patients. Involved patients are thought to be empowered patients who feel a sense of efficacy in regards to their own health. However, there is a lack of understanding of how patients relate to empowerment and involvement and, most importantly, how these constructs relate to one another in patients’ decision-making experiences. \\n \\n \\nMethodology/approach \\nThrough an inductive analysis, this chapter draws on qualitative interviews of women diagnosed with breast cancer prior to 40 years of age (n = 69). \\n \\n \\nFindings \\nBy examining the intersection of how patients define their own involvement in treatment decisions and their sense of empowerment, we find four orientations to decision-making (Advocates, Bystanders, Co-Pilots, and Downplayers) with involvement and empowerment being coupled for some respondents, but decoupled for others. \\n \\n \\nResearch limitations/implications \\nOur findings suggest expanding what it means to be an “active” patient as respondents had multiple ways of characterizing involvement, including being informed or following their doctor’s advice. Our findings also suggest a more critical examination of the origins and potential downsides of patient empowerment as some respondents reported feeling overwhelmed or pushed into advocacy roles. The sample was disproportionately higher socioeconomic status with limited racial/ethnic diversity. Empowerment and involvement may be enacted differently for other social groups and other medical conditions. \\n \\n \\nOriginality/value \\nBy examining first-person patient narratives, we conclude that patients’ experience may not fully align with current academic or clinical discussions of patient involvement or empowerment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74681,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in the sociology of health care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/S0275-495920180000036002\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in the sociology of health care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/S0275-495920180000036002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in the sociology of health care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/S0275-495920180000036002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要目的鼓励患者参与是许多医疗干预和决策模式的基石,以确保治疗决策反映患者的需求、价值观和愿望。相关患者被认为是对自身健康有疗效的患者。然而,人们缺乏对患者如何与赋权和参与相关的理解,最重要的是,缺乏对这些结构在患者决策体验中如何相互关联的理解。方法/方法通过归纳分析,本章对40岁之前诊断为癌症的女性(n=69)进行了定性访谈。研究结果通过检查患者如何定义自己对治疗决策的参与和他们的授权感的交叉点,我们发现了四种决策取向(倡导者、旁观者、联合飞行员和失败者),其中一些受访者的参与和授权是耦合的,但另一些人则是解耦的。研究局限性/影响我们的研究结果表明,作为一名“活跃”的患者,受访者有多种方式来描述参与情况,包括知情或听从医生的建议,这意味着要扩大“活跃”患者的含义。我们的研究结果还表明,对患者赋权的起源和潜在负面影响进行了更严格的检查,因为一些受访者报告说,他们感到不知所措或被迫担任宣传角色。样本的社会经济地位过高,种族/民族多样性有限。对于其他社会群体和其他医疗条件,授权和参与可能会有不同的规定。独创性/价值通过研究第一人称患者叙述,我们得出结论,患者的经历可能与当前关于患者参与或赋权的学术或临床讨论不完全一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Younger Women with Breast Cancer and Treatment Decision-Making: Rethinking Patient Involvement and Empowerment
Abstract Purpose Encouraging patient involvement is a cornerstone of many healthcare interventions and decision-making models to ensure that treatment decisions reflect the needs, values, and desires of patients. Involved patients are thought to be empowered patients who feel a sense of efficacy in regards to their own health. However, there is a lack of understanding of how patients relate to empowerment and involvement and, most importantly, how these constructs relate to one another in patients’ decision-making experiences. Methodology/approach Through an inductive analysis, this chapter draws on qualitative interviews of women diagnosed with breast cancer prior to 40 years of age (n = 69). Findings By examining the intersection of how patients define their own involvement in treatment decisions and their sense of empowerment, we find four orientations to decision-making (Advocates, Bystanders, Co-Pilots, and Downplayers) with involvement and empowerment being coupled for some respondents, but decoupled for others. Research limitations/implications Our findings suggest expanding what it means to be an “active” patient as respondents had multiple ways of characterizing involvement, including being informed or following their doctor’s advice. Our findings also suggest a more critical examination of the origins and potential downsides of patient empowerment as some respondents reported feeling overwhelmed or pushed into advocacy roles. The sample was disproportionately higher socioeconomic status with limited racial/ethnic diversity. Empowerment and involvement may be enacted differently for other social groups and other medical conditions. Originality/value By examining first-person patient narratives, we conclude that patients’ experience may not fully align with current academic or clinical discussions of patient involvement or empowerment.
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
CiteScore
1.00
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信