scholarly journals The relationship between shared-decision making in contraceptive counseling and satisfaction in Accra and Kumasi, Ghana

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 180
Author(s):  
Sarah Compton ◽  
Adom Manu ◽  
Ernest Maya ◽  
Emmanuel Morhe ◽  
Vanessa Dalton
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Longitudinal Survey ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Method Choice ◽  
Contraceptive Usage ◽  
Sub Saharan ◽  
The Relationship

Background:  Current use of modern methods of contraception remain low in many parts of sub-Saharan Africa, including Ghana. One way to improve both satisfaction with and continuation of contraceptive usage is to increase the level of shared decision-making around method choice. In this study, we sought to evaluate the extent to which patients in urban Ghana experienced shared decision-making and if this was associated with method chosen, satisfaction, or continuation of the method at three-months post-visit. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal survey. Women were recruited when they were starting a new method of contraception and followed-up with at three-months post-initiation from five family planning clinics in Accra and Kumasi, Ghana. Participants were asked who made the decision about their method choice, the patient herself, the provider, or the patient and provider together. Our outcomes included measures of satisfaction and three months’ continuation. Results: Fifty-eight percent of our participants reported making the decision of which method to use themselves, and eighty percent reported being satisfied to be leaving with their chosen method. At three months, those who reported they engaged in shared decision-making were more likely to report they would choose the same method again (p=.003), a measure of satisfaction. Patients who reported they made the decision of which method to use (p=.002) and those who left with an injection or pill (p=.019) rated their provider less favorably, while participants who had used a method before (p=.024) and those who reported they received their method of choice (p=.000) rated their providers more favorably. Conclusions: Measured in multiple ways, women who made the decision of which method to use were less satisfied. These results show the importance of providers engaging with patients during the contraceptive decision-making process.

The role of a shared decision-making process in paediatric epilepsy surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 429 ◽  
pp. 119162
Author(s):  
Michelle Gratton ◽  
Bonnie Wooten ◽  
Sandrine Deribaupierre ◽  
Andrea Andrade
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Epilepsy Surgery ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Paediatric Epilepsy

scholarly journals Computer knows best? The need for value-flexibility in medical AI

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 156-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosalind J McDougall
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Treatment ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Patient Autonomy ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Treatment Decision Making ◽  
Value Judgements ◽  
The Relationship

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being developed for use in medicine, including for diagnosis and in treatment decision making. The use of AI in medical treatment raises many ethical issues that are yet to be explored in depth by bioethicists. In this paper, I focus specifically on the relationship between the ethical ideal of shared decision making and AI systems that generate treatment recommendations, using the example of IBM’s Watson for Oncology. I argue that use of this type of system creates both important risks and significant opportunities for promoting shared decision making. If value judgements are fixed and covert in AI systems, then we risk a shift back to more paternalistic medical care. However, if designed and used in an ethically informed way, AI could offer a potentially powerful way of supporting shared decision making. It could be used to incorporate explicit value reflection, promoting patient autonomy. In the context of medical treatment, we need value-flexible AI that can both respond to the values and treatment goals of individual patients and support clinicians to engage in shared decision making.

scholarly journals The Association Between Patients' eHealth Literacy and Satisfaction With Shared Decision-making and Well-being: Multicenter Cross-sectional Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Huan Xu ◽  
Ling-Ming Zhou ◽  
Eliza Lai-Yi Wong ◽  
Dong Wang
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Background Characteristics ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Ehealth Literacy ◽  
High Level ◽  
The Relationship

BACKGROUND Although previous studies have shown that a high level of health literacy can improve patients’ ability to engage in health-related shared decision-making (SDM) and improve their quality of life, few studies have investigated the role of eHealth literacy in improving patient satisfaction with SDM (SSDM) and well-being. OBJECTIVE This study aims to assess the relationship between patients’ eHealth literacy and their socioeconomic determinants and to investigate the association between patients’ eHealth literacy and their SSDM and well-being. METHODS The data used in this study were obtained from a multicenter cross-sectional survey in China. The eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) and Investigating Choice Experiments Capability Measure for Adults were used to measure patients’ eHealth literacy and capability well-being, respectively. The SSDM was assessed by using a self-administered questionnaire. The Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to compare the differences in the eHEALS, SSDM, and Investigating Choice Experiments Capability Measure for Adults scores of patients with varying background characteristics. Ordinary least square regression models were used to assess the relationship among eHealth literacy, SSDM, and well-being adjusted by patients’ background characteristics. RESULTS A total of 569 patients completed the questionnaire. Patients who were male, were highly educated, were childless, were fully employed, were without chronic conditions, and indicated no depressive disorder reported a higher mean score on the eHEALS. Younger patients (SSDM<sub>≥61 years</sub>=88.6 vs SSDM<sub>16-30 years</sub>=84.2) tended to show higher SSDM. Patients who were rural residents and were well paid were more likely to report good capability well-being. Patients who had a higher SSDM and better capability well-being reported a significantly higher level of eHealth literacy than those who had lower SSDM and poorer capability well-being. The regression models showed a positive relationship between eHealth literacy and both SSDM (<i>β</i>=.22; <i>P</i>&lt;.001) and well-being (<i>β</i>=.26; <i>P</i>&lt;.001) after adjusting for patients’ demographic, socioeconomic status, lifestyle, and health status variables. CONCLUSIONS This study showed that patients with a high level of eHealth literacy are more likely to experience optimal SDM and improved capability well-being. However, patients’ depressive status may alter the relationship between eHealth literacy and SSDM. CLINICALTRIAL

scholarly journals Shared decision making for the initiation and continuation of dialysis: a proposal from the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuyoshi Okada ◽  
Ken Tsuchiya ◽  
Ken Sakai ◽  
Takahiro Kuragano ◽  
Akiko Uchida ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Japanese Society ◽  
Healthcare Management ◽  
Maintenance Hemodialysis ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Healthcare Team ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Dialysis Therapy ◽  
Terminal Stage

Abstract Background In Japan, forgoing life-sustaining treatment to respect the will of patients at the terminal stage is not stipulated by law. According to the Guidelines for the Decision-Making Process in Terminal-Stage Healthcare published by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare in 2007, the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy (JSDT) developed a proposal that was limited to patients at the terminal stage and did not explicitly cover patients with dementia. This proposal for the shared decision-making process regarding the initiation and continuation of maintenance hemodialysis was published in 2014. Methods and results In response to changes in social conditions, the JSDT revised the proposal in 2020 to provide guidance for the process by which the healthcare team can provide the best healthcare management and care with respect to the patient's will through advance care planning and shared decision making. For all patients with end-stage kidney disease, including those at the nonterminal stage and those with dementia, the decision-making process includes conservative kidney management. Conclusions The proposal is based on consensus rather than evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. The healthcare team is therefore not guaranteed to be legally exempt if the patient dies after the policies in the proposal are implemented and must respond appropriately at the discretion of each institution.

scholarly journals 023 PP: INVOLVING PATIENTS AND CARERS IN RESEARCH: THE EXPERIENCE OF OLDER PEOPLE IN THE SHARED DECISION-MAKING PROCESS IN ADVANCED KIDNEY CARE a

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (Suppl 2) ◽  
pp. bmjopen-2017-016492.41
Author(s):  
N Thomas ◽  
K Jenkins ◽  
S Datta ◽  
R Endacott ◽  
J Kent ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Older People ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Shared Decision

The relationship between health literacy and perceived shared decision making in patients with breast cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. 360-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsiu-Nien Shen ◽  
Chia-Chen Lin ◽  
Tammy Hoffmann ◽  
Chia-Yin Tsai ◽  
Wen-Hsuan Hou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Literacy ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
The Relationship

Depressed Latinx Older Adults’ Shared Decision-Making Preferences

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Romero ◽  
Patrick Raue ◽  
Andrew Rasmussen
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Puerto Rican ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Medical Conditions ◽  
Depression Severity ◽  
Related Information ◽  
Health Related

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document