scholarly journals Physician–patient communication affects patient satisfaction in treatment decision-making: a structural equation modelling analysis of a web-based survey in patients with ulcerative colitis

Author(s):  
Katsuyoshi Matsuoka ◽  
Hirono Ishikawa ◽  
Takeo Nakayama ◽  
Yusuke Honzawa ◽  
Atsuo Maemoto ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The relationship of bidirectional sharing of information between physicians and patients to patient satisfaction with treatment decision-making for ulcerative colitis (UC) has not been examined. Here, we conducted a web-based survey to evaluate this relationship. Methods Patients aged ≥ 20 years with UC were recruited from the IBD Patient Panel and Japanese IBD Patient Association. Patients completed our web-based survey between 11 May and 1 June 2020. The main outcomes were patient satisfaction (assessed by the Decision Regret Scale) and patient trust in physicians (assessed by the Trust in Physician Scale). Results In this study (n = 457), a structural equation modelling analysis showed that physician-to-patient and patient-to-physician information significantly affected patient satisfaction with treatment decision-making (standardised path coefficient: 0.426 and 0.135, respectively) and patient trust in physicians (0.587 and 0.158, respectively). Notably, physician-to-patient information had a greater impact. For patient satisfaction with treatment decision-making and patient trust in physicians, information on “disease” (indirect effect: 0.342 and 0.471, respectively), “treatment” (0.335 and 0.461, respectively), and “endoscopy” (0.295 and 0.407, respectively) was particularly important, and the level of this information was adequate or almost adequate. Patient-to-physician information on “anxiety and distress” (0.116 and 0.136, respectively), “intention and desire for treatment” (0.113 and 0.132, respectively), and “future expectations of life” (0.104 and 0.121, respectively) were also important for patient satisfaction with treatment decision-making and patient trust in physicians, but these concerns were not adequately communicated. Conclusions Adequate physician–patient communication, especially physician-to-patient information, enhanced patient satisfaction with treatment decision-making for UC.

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 518-524
Author(s):  
Yan Wei ◽  
Jian Ming ◽  
Lizheng Shi ◽  
Xiong Ke ◽  
Hui Sun ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo examine the association between physician–patient treatments shared decision making (SDM), patient satisfaction, and adoption of a new health technology.MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted from July 2016 to October 2016 in Fujian Province and Shanghai, in Eastern China. A total of 542 physicians and 619 patients in eleven hospitals were surveyed. Patients and their treating physicians completed self-reported questionnaires on patient–physician SDM, satisfaction with treatment decision making and adoption of a new health technology. Correlation analysis, multivariate logistic regression and multivariate linear regression were performed.ResultsThe majority (68.20 percent) of patients preferred SDM. Involvement of patients in SDM was positively associated with their satisfaction with treatment decision making (p < .001) and adoption of a new health technology (p < .05). Better concordance between their preference and actual SDM was positively associated with patients' adoption behavior (p < .05), but no statistically significant association was found between concordance and satisfaction.ConclusionSDM was the most important predictor of patients' satisfaction with decision making and adoption of a new health technology. Therefore, better communication between physicians and patients is recommended to improve their SDM, increase patient satisfaction and to assist with the adoption of new technologies. Training healthcare provider and teaching communication skills in working with patients in the initial stage of technology diffusion is required.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4787-4787
Author(s):  
Julie Olson ◽  
Shauna McManus ◽  
Melissa F. Miller ◽  
Thomas W. LeBlanc ◽  
Eva Yuen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Over the past decade, an increase in treatment options for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) has dramatically changed the therapeutic landscape and has improved clinical outcomes. This abundance of treatment options may make it difficult for CML patients to feel knowledgeable about what options are available to them, may hinder patients' preparedness for having conversations about treatment, and, similarly, may contribute to patients feeling less involved in treatment decision making (TDM). In light of this changing landscape, we explored whether the TDM experience was linked to satisfaction with treatment outcomes in a national sample of CML patients. Methods: Using data from the Cancer Support Community's Cancer Experience Registry®, our analytic sample included 310 participants who reported CML as their primary diagnosis. The dependent variable in all analyses was a dichotomous, patient-reported indicator of satisfaction with treatment outcomes (satisfied or not satisfied). Our independent variables include three measures that capture the TDM experience: feeling involved in the TDM process; feeling knowledgeable about treatment options prior to making treatment decisions; and, feeling prepared to discuss treatment options with one's doctor. Respondents ranked TDM knowledge, preparedness, and involvement from 0 = "not at all" to 4 = "very much." Responses were dichotomized such that 1 = "quite a bit" or "very much" and 0 = "not at all," "a little bit" or "somewhat." Analytically, we compared patients who reported high satisfaction with treatment outcomes to those who reported low satisfaction, using Student's t-test. Then, we estimated multivariate logistic regression models predicting odds of being satisfied with treatment outcome by TDM knowledge, preparedness, and involvement. Regression models controlled for demographic characteristics including age, gender, and race; clinical factors such as time since diagnosis and symptom burden; treatment-related measures including financial impact of treatment; and the degree to which individuals felt their health care teams prepared them to manage treatment side effects. Results: Descriptively, our sample was 65% female and 87% non-Hispanic White, with an average age of 56.6 years (SD = 12) and mean time since diagnosis of 6 years (SD = 5). Most (74%) reported being "quite a bit" to "very much satisfied" with their treatment outcomes. Experiences with TDM, however, were variable. When making treatment decisions, 52% reported feeling involved, 41% reported feeling knowledgeable, and 21% felt prepared. Importantly, t-test results suggested that individuals with greater involvement, more knowledge, and higher preparedness were significantly more likely to report satisfaction with treatment outcomes. Results of the multivariate models demonstrated a greater likelihood of treatment satisfaction among individuals who felt prepared to discuss treatment options with their health care team, even after controlling for demographic, clinical, and treatment-related characteristics. In fact, prepared individuals were nearly 6 times as likely to be satisfied with their treatment outcomes, as compared to individuals who did not feel prepared to discuss treatment options (p < .05). Conclusion: Most of our patients with CML did not feel prepared to make treatment decisions. However, those who feel more prepared to discuss treatment options with their doctors are also more likely to report satisfaction with treatment outcomes. As new CML treatment options become available, our results highlight the need for an increased focus on shared decision making in clinical practice. This may necessitate providing patients with more resources to help prepare them for treatment-related conversations. Disclosures Birhiray: Takeda: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genomic Health: Patents & Royalties; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Consultancy; Puma: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Norvatis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eli-Lilly: Speakers Bureau; Excelis: Speakers Bureau; Clovis Oncology: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi Oncology: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Tessaro: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Helsinn: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


2014 ◽  
Vol 94 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mónica E. López ◽  
Celia P. Kaplan ◽  
Anna M. Nápoles ◽  
E. Shelley Hwang ◽  
Jennifer C. Livaudais ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document