scholarly journals The Use of ‘Talking Mats’ by Persons with Alzheimer in the Netherlands: Increasing Shared Decision‐Making by Using a Low‐ Tech Communication Aid

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corinna Reitz ◽  
Ruth Dalemans
2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 568.2-568
Author(s):  
L. Kranenburg ◽  
M. Dankbaar ◽  
N. Basoski ◽  
W. Van den Broek ◽  
J. Hazes

Background:The training curriculum for rheumatologists in training in the Netherlands describes competences and entrusted professional activities (EPA) to monitor the progress in learning. However, this training program does not discuss training of Shared Decision Making. As the basis for shared care and patient participation is made during these years, the question arises how rheumatologist in training think about Shared Decision Making and how they use this in daily practice.Objectives:Inventory of vision, experience and self-evaluation of skills related to Shared Decision Making amongst rheumatologists in training in the Netherlands in order to identify barriers in the implementation of Shared Decision Making in daily practice.Methods:Qualitative data was collected from on online survey amongst rheumatologists in training who were registered in January 2018 by the Dutch Society of Rheumatology.Results:Forty-two rheumatologists in training from various years of training responded (60%). Respondents think that Shared Decision Making is important. A third applies Shared Decision Making on a regular basis in daily practice. Self rating of skills for Shared Decision Making varies from sufficient to good. However, respondents are uncertain about their performance due to a lack of feedback and unclearness of the concept. They indicate that Shared Decision Making is not possible for all patients and find it difficult to assess whether the patient has a clear understanding of the options. Patient’s preferences are discussed only by 33% of the doctors on a regular basis when starting new treatment.Conclusion:Rheumatologists in training agree on the importance of Shared Decision Making, but are uncertain about their performance. Unclearness of the concept is described as a known barrier in literature1,2and is frequently mentioned by respondents. Rheumatologist in training indicate that not all patients are fit for Shared Decision Making. Regarding the limited training on the subject this could also be a misjudgment of patients preferences and lack of experience how to deal with different patient types. There is a clear plea for more training and feedback on the subject. Training should be integrated in the curriculum focusing on how to assess patients preferences and how to apply Shared Decision Making also for patients who indicate to leave decisions up to their doctor.References:[1]van Veenendaal, H.et al.Accelerating implementation of shared decision-making in the Netherlands: An exploratory investigation.Patient Educ Couns101, 2097-2104 (2018).[2]Legare, F., Ratte, S., Gravel, K. & Graham, I. D. Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: update of a systematic review of health professionals’ perceptions.Patient Educ Couns73, 526-535 (2008).Disclosure of Interests:Laura Kranenburg Grant/research support from: Pfizer and UCB for the development of the Reuma App, a tool to support selfmanagement for patients. This is not used for the research related to the submitted abstract., Mary Dankbaar: None declared, Natalja Basoski: None declared, Walter Van den Broek: None declared, Johanna Hazes: None declared


Author(s):  
Trudy van der Weijden ◽  
Heleen Post ◽  
Paul L P Brand ◽  
Haske van Veenendaal ◽  
Ton Drenthen ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 437-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathieu Verbrugghe ◽  
Lonneke Timmers ◽  
Christel C.L.M. Boons ◽  
Bart J.F. Van Den Bemt ◽  
Jacqueline G. Hugtenburg ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 101 (12) ◽  
pp. 2097-2104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haske van Veenendaal ◽  
Trudy van der Weijden ◽  
Dirk T. Ubbink ◽  
Anne M. Stiggelbout ◽  
Linda A. van Mierlo ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Reza Negarandeh ◽  
Zahra Yazdani ◽  
Sarina Ramtin ◽  
Leila Janani

Background & Aim: Shared decision making belongs to the continuum between the two decision-making paradigms of the paternalistic perspective and the client’s complete independence. Various interventions, including the Question Prompt List have been developed to facilitate patients’ participation in counseling. This study aims to investigate the effects of question prompt list on shared decision making among cancer patients. Methods & Materials: For this study, the researchers performed a systematic review of the manuscripts available in Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases which were published until January 2021. And then, the eligible studies investigating the effect of question prompt list on shared decision making were included in the study. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results: Two eligible papers were included in the study, and it was reported that question prompt list was provided before the patients’ consultation with the physician. Both studies have used OPTION 12 to measure shared decision making. The two articles reported that patient communication aid and question prompt list had no significant effect on improving shared decision making through OPTION 12. Conclusion: The findings of this systematic review could not confirm the impact of using question prompt list on shared decision making. more preliminary studies are needed to answer the question expressed by this systematic review study.


2019 ◽  
Vol 102 (5) ◽  
pp. 916-923 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inge Henselmans ◽  
Sabrina D. Brugel ◽  
Hanneke C.J.M. de Haes ◽  
Kim J.A. Wolvetang ◽  
Laura M. de Vries ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document