scholarly journals EFFECTS OF A SHARED DECISION MAKING INTERVENTION FOR OLDER ADULTS WITH CHRONIC CONDITIONS: AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S296-S297
Author(s):  
Ruth E Pel-Littel ◽  
Bianca Buurman ◽  
Marjolein van de Pol ◽  
Linda Tulner ◽  
Mirella Minkman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Multiple Chronic Conditions ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Perceived Involvement

Abstract Shared decision making (SDM) in older patients is more complex when multiple chronic conditions (MCC) have to be taken into account. The aim of this research is to explore the effect of the evidence based implementation intervention SDMMCC on (1) the preferred and perceived participation (2) decisional conflict and (3) actual SDM during consultations. 216 outpatients participated in a video observational study. The intervention existed of a SDM training for geriatricians and a preparatory tool for patients. Consultations were videotaped and coded with the OPTIONMCC. Pre- and post-consultation questionnaires were completed. Participation was measured by the Patients’ perceived Involvement in Care Scale (PICS). Decisional conflict was measured by the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). The patients mean age was 77 years, 56% was female. The preparatory tool was completed by 56 older adults (52%), of which 64% rated the tool as positive. The preparatory tool was used in 12% of the consultations. The mean overall OPTIONMCC score showed no significant changes on the level of SDM(39.3 vs 39.3 P0.98), however there were significant improvements on discussing goals and options on sub-items of the scale. There were no significant differences found in the match on preferred and perceived participation (86.5% vs 85.0% P 0.595) or in decisional conflict (22.7 vs 22.9 P0.630). The limited use of the preparatory tool could have biased the effect of the intervention. In future research more attention must be paid towards the implementation of preparatory tools, not only among patients but also among geriatricians.

scholarly journals Crafting Care That Fits: Workload and Capacity Assessments Complementing Decision Aids in Implementing Shared Decision Making (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas H Wieringa ◽  
Manuel F Sanchez-Herrera ◽  
Nataly R Espinoza ◽  
Viet-Thi Tran ◽  
Kasey Boehmer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Multiple Chronic Conditions ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Patient Goals ◽  
Minimally Disruptive Medicine ◽  
Workload Capacity

UNSTRUCTURED About 42% of adults have one or more chronic conditions and 23% have multiple chronic conditions. The coordination and integration of services for the management of patients living with multimorbidity is important for care to be efficient, safe, and less burdensome. Minimally disruptive medicine may optimize this coordination and integration. It is a patient-centered approach to care that focuses on achieving patient goals for life and health by seeking care strategies that fit a patient’s context and are minimally disruptive and maximally supportive. The cumulative complexity model practically orients minimally disruptive medicine–based care. In this model, the patient workload-capacity imbalance is the central mechanism driving patient complexity. These elements should be accounted for when making decisions for patients with chronic conditions. Therefore, in addition to decision aids, which may guide shared decision making, we propose to discuss and clarify a potential workload-capacity imbalance.

scholarly journals THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTERVENTION TO IMPROVE SHARED DECISION MAKING IN GERIATRIC OUTPATIENTS

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S297-S297
Author(s):  
Ruth E Pel-Littel ◽  
Julia van Weert ◽  
Mirella Minkman ◽  
Wilma Scholte op Reimer ◽  
Marjolein van de Pol ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Informal Caregivers ◽  
Complex Interventions ◽  
End Users ◽  
Multiple Chronic Conditions ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Share Information

Abstract Shared decision making (SDM) contributes to personalised decisions that fit the personal preferences of patients. However, older adults frequently face multiple chronic conditions (MCC). Therefore, implementing SDM requires special features. The aim of this paper is to describe the development of an intervention to improve SDM in older adults with MCC. Following the Medical Research Council framework for developing complex interventions, the SDMMCC intervention was developed step-wise. Based on a literature review and empirical research we developed in a co-creation process with the end-users a training for geriatricians and a preparatory tool for older patients with MCC and informal caregivers. After assessing feasibility the intervention was implemented at two outpatient geriatric clinics in a pilot study (N=108). Key elements of the training for geriatricians include: developing skills how to involve older adults with MCC and informal caregivers in SDM and learning how to explore personal goals related to quality of life. Key elements of the preparatory tool for patients include: an explicit invitation to participate in SDM, nomination that the patient’s own knowledge is valuable, invitation to form a partnership with the geriatrician, encouragement to share information about daily and social functioning and exploration of possible goals. Furthermore, invitation of informal caregivers to share their concerns. Through a process of co-creation both a training for geriatricians and a preparatory tool for older adults and their informal caregivers were developed, tailored to the needs of the end-users and based on the ‘Dynamic model of SDM with frail older adults’.

scholarly journals Barriers and facilitators for shared decision making in older patients with multiple chronic conditions: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth E. Pel-Littel ◽  
Marjolein Snaterse ◽  
Nelly Marela Teppich ◽  
Bianca M. Buurman ◽  
Faridi S. van Etten-Jamaludin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Informal Caregivers ◽  
Poor Health ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Multiple Chronic Conditions ◽  
Shared Decision

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to describe barriers and facilitators for shared decision making (SDM) as experienced by older patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs), informal caregivers and health professionals. Methods A structured literature search was conducted with 5 databases. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for eligibility and performed a quality assessment. The results from the included studies were summarized using a predefined taxonomy. Results Our search yielded 3838 articles. Twenty-eight studies, listing 149 perceived barriers and 67 perceived facilitators for SDM, were included. Due to poor health and cognitive and/or physical impairments, older patients with MCCs participate less in SDM. Poor interpersonal skills of health professionals are perceived as hampering SDM, as do organizational barriers, such as pressure for time and high turnover of patients. However, among older patients with MCCs, SDM could be facilitated when patients share information about personal values, priorities and preferences, as well as information about quality of life and functional status. Informal caregivers may facilitate SDM by assisting patients with decision support, although informal caregivers can also complicate the SDM process, for example, when they have different views on treatment or the patient’s capability to be involved. Coordination of care when multiple health professionals are involved is perceived as important. Conclusions Although poor health is perceived as a barrier to participate in SDM, the personal experience of living with MCCs is considered valuable input in SDM. An explicit invitation to participate in SDM is important to older adults. Health professionals need a supporting organizational context and good communication skills to devise an individualized approach for patient care.

scholarly journals Crafting Care That Fits: Workload and Capacity Assessments Complementing Decision Aids in Implementing Shared Decision Making

10.2196/13763 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. e13763
Author(s):  
Thomas H Wieringa ◽  
Manuel F Sanchez-Herrera ◽  
Nataly R Espinoza ◽  
Viet-Thi Tran ◽  
Kasey Boehmer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Multiple Chronic Conditions ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Patient Goals ◽  
Minimally Disruptive Medicine ◽  
Workload Capacity

About 42% of adults have one or more chronic conditions and 23% have multiple chronic conditions. The coordination and integration of services for the management of patients living with multimorbidity is important for care to be efficient, safe, and less burdensome. Minimally disruptive medicine may optimize this coordination and integration. It is a patient-centered approach to care that focuses on achieving patient goals for life and health by seeking care strategies that fit a patient’s context and are minimally disruptive and maximally supportive. The cumulative complexity model practically orients minimally disruptive medicine–based care. In this model, the patient workload-capacity imbalance is the central mechanism driving patient complexity. These elements should be accounted for when making decisions for patients with chronic conditions. Therefore, in addition to decision aids, which may guide shared decision making, we propose to discuss and clarify a potential workload-capacity imbalance.

The impact of patient narratives on medical students’ perceptions of shared decision making: A randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Bientzle ◽  
Marie Eggeling ◽  
Simone Korger ◽  
Joachim Kimmerle
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Students ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Medical Training ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Information Text ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND: Successful shared decision making (SDM) in clinical practice requires that future clinicians learn to appreciate the value of patient participation as early as in their medical training. Narratives, such as patient testimonials, have been successfully used to support patients’ decision-making process. Previous research suggests that narratives may also be used for increasing clinicians’ empathy and responsiveness in medical consultations. However, so far, no studies have investigated the benefits of narratives for conveying the relevance of SDM to medical students.METHODS: In this randomized controlled experiment, N = 167 medical students were put into a scenario where they prepared for medical consultation with a patient having Parkinson disease. After receiving general information, participants read either a narrative patient testimonial or a fact-based information text. We measured their perceptions of SDM, their control preferences (i.e., their priorities as to who should make the decision), and the time they intended to spend for the consultation.RESULTS: Participants in the narrative patient testimonial condition referred more strongly to the patient as the one who should make decisions than participants who read the information text. Participants who read the patient narrative also considered SDM in situations with more than one treatment option to be more important than participants in the information text condition. There were no group differences regarding their control preferences. Participants who read the patient testimonial indicated that they would schedule more time for the consultation.CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that narratives can potentially be useful for imparting the relevance of SDM and patient-centered values to medical students. We discuss possible causes of this effect and implications for training and future research.

High-risk surgery among older adults: Not-quite shared decision-making

Surgery ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana C. De Roo ◽  
Crystal Ann Vitous ◽  
Samantha J. Rivard ◽  
Michaela C. Bamdad ◽  
Sara M. Jafri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision

Shared Decision Making in Common Chronic Conditions: Impact of a Resident Training Workshop

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leigh Simmons ◽  
Lauren Leavitt ◽  
Alaka Ray ◽  
Blair Fosburgh ◽  
Karen Sepucha
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Resident Training ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Training Workshop

scholarly journals Multidisciplinary teams caring for people with variations of sex characteristics: a scoping review

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. e001257
Author(s):  
Martin Gramc ◽  
Jürg Streuli ◽  
Eva de Clercq
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Ethical Principles ◽  
Care Process ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Medical Professionals ◽  
Sex Characteristics ◽  
Multidisciplinary Teams ◽  
Shared Decision

BackgroundIn 2006 the Chicago consensus statement on the management of people with variations of sex characteristics (VSC) acknowledged the importance of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach. The consensus update from 2016 reinforced the call for multidisciplinary collaborations between medical professionals, parents and support groups, and proposed guidelines to improve shared decision making and patient-centred care embedded in ethical principles of self-determination and child participation. But there is little evidence that successfully MDTs have been implemented in clinical practice.Methods and aimsA scoping review was conducted to identify studies that address the collaboration and decision making process of MDTs providing care of people with VSC to identify ideal and actual (1) team composition; (2) models of collaboration and (3) ethical principles that MDTs follow. Six databases were systematically searched: CINAHIL, Medline, Psychinfo, Scopus, Socindex and Web of Science. No restriction was placed on the type of methodology used in the studies. To frame the research, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was used.ResultsThe MDTs in the literature include mainly medical professionals: endocrinologists, urologists and surgeons. The collaboration among medical professionals in MDTs lacks cooperation as one team member sets the tasks of the team while each professional works separately. Despite the importance of psycho-social support the involvement of psychologists remains secondary. The implementation of ethical principles tends to exclude people with VSC.ConclusionThe care of people with VSC described in the papers is medically oriented as the team members are mainly medical professionals working separately. MDT tend to exclude people with VSC despite references to shared decision making processes and informed consent. There was no mention of adult care and lack of inclusion of patient’s perspective in the care process. The future research should do more empirical research of MDTs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document