Validation of a Japanese Version of the Decision Regret Scale

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 44E-54E ◽  
Author(s):  
Kiyomi Tanno ◽  
Seiji Bito ◽  
Yoh Isobe ◽  
Yasuo Takagi

Background and Purpose: In Japanese health care, no current index measures patient satisfaction with decision making during the treatment process. Our research aimed to test a Japanese version of the Decision Regret Scale (DRS) for this purpose. Methods: We distributed a Japanese version of the DRS twice, 3 weeks apart, to 80 postoperative patients younger than the age of 85 years with inguinal hernias, cholelithiasis, cholecystitis, and gallbladder polyps. Results: The reliability (α = .85) and validity of the Japanese version of the DRS was demonstrated among postoperative patients. Conclusion: The Japanese version of the DRS will have significant implications for clinicians in improving their shared decision making with patients.

Birth ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Munro ◽  
Elizabeth S. Wilcox ◽  
Leah K. Lambert ◽  
Monica Norena ◽  
Sarah Kaufman ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 233339361878363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brianne Wood ◽  
Virginia L. Russell ◽  
Ziad El-Khatib ◽  
Susan McFaul ◽  
Monica Taljaard ◽  
...  

In this study, we examine from multiple perspectives, women’s shared decision-making needs when considering cervical screening options: Pap testing, in-clinic human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, self-collected HPV testing, or no screening. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework guided the development of the interview schedule. We conducted semi-structured interviews with seven screen-eligible women and five health care professionals (three health care providers and two health system managers). Women did not perceive that cervical screening involves a “decision,” which limited their knowledge of options, risks, and benefits. Women and health professionals emphasized how a trusted primary care provider can support women making a choice among cervical screening modalities. Having all cervical screening options recommended and funded was perceived as an important step to facilitate shared decision making. Supporting women in making preference-based decisions in cervical cancer screening may increase screening among those who do not undergo screening regularly and decrease uptake in women who are over-screened.


2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabrielle Rocque ◽  
Ellen Miller-Sonnet ◽  
Alan Balch ◽  
Carrie Stricker ◽  
Josh Seidman ◽  
...  

Although recognized as best practice, regular integration of shared decision-making (SDM) approaches between patients and oncologists remains an elusive goal. It is clear that usable, feasible, and practical tools are needed to drive increased SDM in oncology. To address this goal, we convened a multidisciplinary collaborative inclusive of experts across the health-care delivery ecosystem to identify key principles in designing and testing processes to promote SDM in routine oncology practice. In this commentary, we describe 3 best practices for addressing challenges associated with implementing SDM that emerged from a multidisciplinary collaborative: (1) engagement of diverse stakeholders who have interest in SDM, (2) development and validation of an evidence-based SDM tool grounded within an established conceptual framework, and (3) development of the necessary roadmap and consideration of the infrastructure needed for engendering patient engagement in decision-making. We believe these 3 principles are critical to the success of creating SDM tools to be utilized both within and outside of clinical practice. We are optimistic that shared use across settings will support adoption of this tool and overcome barriers to implementing SDM within busy clinical workflows. Ultimately, we hope that this work will offer new perspectives on what is important to patients and provide an important impetus for leveraging patient preferences and values in decision-making.


Author(s):  
Rosalind Austin

AbstractThis chapter explores the values issues arising in voice-hearing through the resources of a new skills-based approach to working with values called values-based practice. The chapter is focused on the experiences of two voice-hearers, Paul and Mary, so as to highlight the diversity of ways that people experience voice-hearing, and how a correspondingly nuanced way of supporting voice-hearers is needed. It employs an inclusive definition of values covering anything that matters or is important to the person concerned. The chapter demonstrates that values-based practice in voice-hearing supports shared decision-making when working with values challenges in health care. Both Paul’s and Mary’s stories offer illustrations of the complex and sometimes conflicting values associated with voice-hearing.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document