scholarly journals Opportunities for addressing gaps in primary care shared decision-making with technology: a mixed-methods needs assessment

JAMIA Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 447-455
Author(s):  
Anjali J Misra ◽  
Shawn Y Ong ◽  
Arjun Gokhale ◽  
Sameer Khan ◽  
Edward R Melnick

Abstract Objectives To analyze current practices in shared decision-making (SDM) in primary care and perform a needs assessment for the role of information technology (IT) interventions. Materials and Methods A mixed-methods study was conducted in three phases: (1) ethnographic observation of clinical encounters, (2) patient interviews, and (3) physician interviews. SDM was measured using the validated OPTION scale. Semistructured interviews followed an interview guide (developed by our multidisciplinary team) informed by the Traditional Decision Conflict Scale and Shared Decision Making Questionnaire. Field notes were independently coded and analyzed by two reviewers in Dedoose. Results Twenty-four patient encounters were observed in 3 diverse practices with an average OPTION score of 57.2 (0–100 scale; 95% confidence interval [CI], 51.8–62.6). Twenty-two patient and 8 physician interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was achieved. Cohen’s kappa, measuring coder agreement, was 0.42. Patient domains were: establishing trust, influence of others, flexibility, frustrations, values, and preferences. Physician domains included frustrations, technology (concerns, existing use, and desires), and decision making (current methods used, challenges, and patients’ understanding). Discussion Given low SDM observed, multiple opportunities for technology to enhance SDM exist based on specific OPTION items that received lower scores, including: (1) checking the patient’s preferred information format, (2) asking the patient's preferred level of involvement in decision making, and (3) providing an opportunity for deferring a decision. Based on data from interviews, patients and physicians value information exchange and are open to technologies that enhance communication of care options. Conclusion Future primary care IT platforms should prioritize the 3 quantitative gaps identified to improve physician–patient communication and relationships. Additionally, SDM tools should seek to standardize common workflow steps across decisions and focus on barriers to increasing adoption of effective SDM tools into routine primary care.

2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-5

AbstractOverview of: Murray S, Augustyniak M, Murase JE, et al. Barriers to shared decision-making with women of reproductive age affected by a chronic inflammatory disease: a mixed-methods needs assessment of dermatologists and rheumatologists. BMJ Open. 2021;11:e043960.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. e036969
Author(s):  
David Forner ◽  
Paul Hong ◽  
Martin Corsten ◽  
Valeria E Rac ◽  
Rosemary Martino ◽  
...  

IntroductionAdvanced oral cancer and its ensuing treatment engenders significant morbidity and mortality. Patients are often elderly with significant comorbidities. Toxicities associated with surgical resection can be devastating and they are often highlighted by patients as impactful. Given the potential for suboptimal oncological and functional outcomes in this vulnerable patient population, promotion and performance of shared decision making (SDM) is crucial.Decision aids (DAs) are useful instruments for facilitating the SDM process by presenting patients with up-to-date evidence regarding risks, benefits and the possible postoperative course. Importantly, DAs also help elicit and clarify patient values and preferences. The use of DAs in cancer treatment has been shown to reduce decisional conflict and increase SDM. No DAs for oral cavity cancer have yet been developed.This study endeavours to answer the question: Is there a patient or surgeon driven need for development and implementation of a DA for adult patients considering major surgery for oral cancer?Methods and analysisThis study is the first step in a multiphase investigation of SDM during major head and neck surgery. It is a multi-institutional convergent parallel mixed-methods needs assessment study. Patients and surgeon dyads will be recruited to complete questionnaires related to their perception of the SDM process (nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire, SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc) and to take part in semistructured interviews. Patients will also complete questionnaires examining decisional self-efficacy (Ottawa Decision Self-Efficacy Scale) and decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale). Questionnaires will be completed at time of recruitment and will be used to assess the current level of SDM, self-efficacy and conflict in this setting. Thematic analysis will be used to analyse transcripts of interviews. Quantitative and qualitative components of the study will be integrated through triangulation, with matrix developed to promote visualisation of the data.Ethics and DisseminationThis study has been approved by the research ethics boards of the Nova Scotia Health Authority (Halifax, Nova Scotia) and the University Health Network (Toronto, Ontario). Dissemination to clinicians will be through traditional approaches and creation of a head and neck cancer SDM website. Dissemination to patients will include a section within the website, patient advocacy groups and postings within clinical environments.


BJGP Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. BJGPO.2021.0100
Author(s):  
Neil Heron ◽  
Seán R O’Connor ◽  
Frank Kee ◽  
David R Thompson ◽  
Margaret Cupples ◽  
...  

BackgroundThe important role of primary care in promoting healthy lifestyle behaviours needs informed support.AimTo elicit views on a 39-item shared decision-making (SDM) aid (SHARE-D) for lifestyle change and refine it to improve implementation.Design & settingMixed methods study.MethodHealth professionals, patients, and support workers, with experience of managing, or a history of, cardio- or cerebrovascular disease, were purposively recruited based on age, gender, and urban/rural location (n = 34). Participants completed a survey, rating the importance of including each item in a decision-aid, designed for use by patients with health professionals, and suggesting modifications. Semi-structured interviews (n = 30/34) were conducted and analysed thematically.ResultsSubstantial agreement was observed on rating item inclusion. Based on survey and interview data, 9/39 items were removed; 13 were amended. Qualitative themes were: (i) core content of the decision-aid, (ii) barriers to use, (iii) motivation for lifestyle change, and (iv) primary care implementation. ‘Self-reflective’ questions and goal setting were viewed as essential components. The paper-based format, length, clarity, and time required were barriers to its use. Optional support considered within the aid was seen as important to motivate change. A digital version, integrated into patient record systems was regarded as critical to implementation. A revised 30-item aid was considered suitable for facilitating brief conversations and promoting patient autonomy.ConclusionThe SHARE-D decision aid for healthy lifestyle change appears to have good content validity and acceptability. Survey and interview data provided in-depth information to support implementation of a refined version. Further studies should examine its effectiveness.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-7
Author(s):  
Ping Yein Lee ◽  
Chirk Jenn Ng

Making healthcare decisions collaboratively between patients and doctors can be challenging in primary care, as clinical encounters are often short. Conflicts between patients and doctors during the decision-making process may affect both patient and doctor satisfaction and result in medicolegal consequences. With the increasing recognition of the importance of patient empowerment, shared decision making (SDM) can serve as a practical consultation model for primary care doctors (PCDs) to guide patients in making informed healthcare choices. Although more research is needed to find effective ways to implement SDM in the real world, the 6-step approach presented in this paper can guide PCDs to practise SDM in their daily practice. Implementation of SDM can be further enhanced by incorporating SDM training into undergraduate and postgraduate curricula and using evidence-based tools such as patient decision aids.


Author(s):  
Debra Parker Oliver ◽  
Karla T. Washington ◽  
Kyle Pitzer ◽  
Lori Popejoy ◽  
Patrick White ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 75 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. 7512510247p1-7512510247p1
Author(s):  
Jennifer Weaver ◽  
Trudy Mallinson ◽  
Leslie Davidson ◽  
Christina Papadimitriou ◽  
Ann Guernon ◽  
...  

Abstract Date Presented Accepted for AOTA INSPIRE 2021 but unable to be presented due to online event limitations. This qualitative, observational research study explored treatment encounters between patients with disorders of consciousness, rehabilitation practitioners, and family to understand how treatment decisions occurred. The data showed shared decision making (SDM) occurring as a process, meaning that not all five principles of SDM occur in one clinical encounter but rather unfold across multiple clinical encounters. We delineate differences in SDM between rehabilitation and the medical model. Primary Author and Speaker: Jennifer Weaver Contributing Authors: Trudy Mallinson, Leslie Davidson, Christina Papadimitriou, Ann Guernon, and Philip van der Wees


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Romero ◽  
Patrick Raue ◽  
Andrew Rasmussen

The shared decision-making (SDM) model is the optimal patient-centered approach to reduce racial and ethnic health disparities in primary care settings. This study examined decision-making preferences and the desire to be knowledgeable of health-related information of a multiheritage group of depressed older Latinx primary care patients. The primary aim was to determine differences in treatment preferences for both general medical conditions and depression and desire to be knowledgeable of health-related information between older Puerto Rican adults compared to older non-Puerto Rican Latinx adults. We also examined whether depression severity moderated those relationships. A sample of 178 older Latinx patients were assessed on measures of decision-making preferences, information-seeking desires, and depression severity. Regression models indicated depression severity moderated the relationship between Latinx heritage and decision-making preferences that relate to general medical decisions, but not depression treatment. Specifically, Puerto Ricans with high levels of depression preferred to be more active in making decisions related to general medical conditions compared to non-Puerto Rican patients who preferred less active involvement. There was no difference between groups at low levels of depression as both groups preferred to be similarly active in the decision-making process. This investigation adds to the literature by indicating between-group differences within a Latinx older adult sample regarding decision-making preferences and the desire to be informed of health-related information. Future research is needed to identify other sociocultural characteristics that contribute to this disparity between Latinx heritage groups in their desires to participate in the decision-making process with their primary care provider.


Author(s):  
Fiona Jones ◽  
Sara Demain

This chapter examines self-management in a way that introduces evidence, ideas, and concepts which illustrate the benefits of a personalized collaborative approach to neurorehabilitation. It reviews constructions of self-management from the chronic disease literature and the relevance to neurology and overlapping methods such as shared decision-making, health coaching, and motivational interviewing. It also reviews the benefits of integrating key self-management strategies into clinical encounters and current methods of measuring outcomes. It has been written for any healthcare professional who seeks to understand how to support and enable self-management within neurorehabilitation.


2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 126-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophy Barber ◽  
Sue Pavitt ◽  
David Meads ◽  
Balvinder Khambay ◽  
Hilary Bekker

Objective: To determine the extent to which the current care pathway in hypodontia promotes shared decision-making (SDM). Design: Exploratory cross-sectional study using qualitative methods. Setting: Orthodontic department of two NHS teaching hospitals in Yorkshire. Participants: Young people aged 12–16 years with hypodontia of any severity and at any stage of treatment, and their parents and guardians. Methods: (1) Observation and audio-recording of interdisciplinary consultation in hypodontia clinics (n = 5) without any researcher interference; (2) short, structured interviews with young people with hypodontia (n = 8) and their parent (n = 8) using a topic guide to explore themes around decision-making. Audio-recordings were transcribed and analysed using a thematic framework. Results: Consultations were used as an opportunity for interdisciplinary discussion, information provision and treatment planning. Evidence of good communication was observed but patient engagement was low. The decision to be made was usually stated and treatment options discussed, but time constraints limited the scope for adequate information exchange and assessment of understanding. No methods were used to establish patient and family preferences or values. Interviews suggested parents expect the dental team to make decisions and young people rely on parental advocacy. Despite little evidence of SDM, participants reported satisfaction with their treatment. Conclusions: The current care pathway for hypodontia does not support clinicians in the steps of SDM. Recommendations for improving SDM processes include support to identify preference-based decisions, greater access to comprehensive and accessible patient information to enable preparation for consultation, alternative methods for effective communication of complex information and use of preference elicitation tools to aid value-driven decision-making.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document