scholarly journals Een goed begin

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-114
Author(s):  
Suzanne M. Schuurman ◽  
Ellen M. Driever ◽  
Tom Koole ◽  
Paul L.P. Brand

Abstract Well begun is half done. Deontic and epistemic authority in the opening phase of medical consultations Context: An effective consultation opening with attention to patient participation not only increases patient satisfaction, but is also a prerequisite for shared decision making, which may improve health outcomes and reduce healthcare costs. Methods: Using conversation analysis, we examined linguistic and structural characteristics of 41 video recorded consultation openings of medical specialists at a large Dutch teaching hospital. The main purpose was to give an overview of how doctors and patients interactionally shape deontic and epistemic authority. Results: Conversation analysis showed different ways in which doctors open their consultations and patients’ reactions to this. Agenda setting occurred in 6 cases, this was always the doctor’s agenda. Most of the doctors’ utterances during this phase displayed a high deontic stance and none of the patients were invited to discuss their expectations or goals for the consultation. 30 doctors started with their opening question, which in itself also reflects a high deontic stance. During the opening questions, the doctors’ epistemic stances differed. Conclusion: During the consultation openings, the doctor was clearly in charge of the conversation and often did not explore the knowledge domain of the patient. This can limit patient participation and can hinder shared decision making in the consultation.

Author(s):  
Martin Härter ◽  
Hardy Müller ◽  
Jörg Dirmaier ◽  
Norbert Donner-Banzhoff ◽  
Christiane Bieber ◽  
...  

Heart ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. heartjnl-2021-320194
Author(s):  
Judith J A M van Beek-Peeters ◽  
Jop B L van der Meer ◽  
Miriam C Faes ◽  
Annemarie J B M de Vos ◽  
Martijn W A van Geldorp ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo provide insight into professionals’ perceptions of and experiences with shared decision-making (SDM) in the treatment of symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS).MethodsA semistructured interview study was performed in the heart centres of academic and large teaching hospitals in the Netherlands between June and December 2020. Cardiothoracic surgeons, interventional cardiologists, nurse practitioners and physician assistants (n=21) involved in the decision-making process for treatment of severe AS were interviewed. An inductive thematic analysis was used to identify, analyse and report patterns in the data.ResultsFour primary themes were generated: (1) the concept of SDM, (2) knowledge, (3) communication and interaction, and (4) implementation of SDM. Not all respondents considered patient participation as an element of SDM. They experienced a discrepancy between patients’ wishes and treatment options. Respondents explained that not knowing patient preferences for health improvement hinders SDM and complicating patient characteristics for patient participation were perceived. A shared responsibility for improving SDM was suggested for patients and all professionals involved in the decision-making process for severe AS.ConclusionsProfessionals struggle to make highly complex treatment decisions part of SDM and to embed patients’ expectations of treatment and patients’ preferences. Additionally, organisational constraints complicate the SDM process. To ensure sustainable high-quality care, professionals should increase their awareness of patient participation in SDM, and collaboration in the pathway for decision-making in severe AS is required to support the documentation and availability of information according to the principles of SDM.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 311-317
Author(s):  
Lise Sæstad Beyene ◽  
Elisabeth Severinsson ◽  
Britt Sætre Hansen ◽  
Kristine Rørtveit

Background: Patients in mental care express a wish for more active participation. Shared decision-making is a way of increasing patient participation. There is lack of research into what the shared decision-making process means and how the patients can participate in and experience it in the context of mental care. Objective: To describe patient participation in shared decision-making in the context of indoor mental care. Method: A qualitative content analysis of data from in-depth interviews with 16 patients was performed. Results: One main theme was revealed: thriving in relation to participating actively in a complementary ensemble of care, which represented the red thread between 2 themes: having mental space to discover my way forward and being in a position to express my case. Conclusion: Patients can participate actively in shared decision-making when the patients’ and the mental health-care professionals’ joint expertise is applied throughout their mental care. The patients experience thriving when participating actively in a complementary ensemble of care.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lise Sæstad Beyene

Background: Shared decision-making is understood to be a process where the patients and the mental healthcare professionals are engaged in a dialogue of information in order to understand each other’s preferences and values regarding care and to agree on a plan of action. This understanding is mainly derived from a medical context. It is important that the scientific knowledge of shared decision-making is linked to the practice where it is to be carried out. The understanding of shared decision-making and its meaning in mental care needs to be developed, based on a caring science perspective. Aims: The overall aim of this study was to develop a deeper understanding of the meaning of shared decision-making in mental care. The specific aims of the three sub-studies were: I) To describe patient participation in shared decision-making in the context of indoor mental care. II) To explore how mental healthcare professionals describe shared decision-making in a therapeutic milieu as expressed through clinical supervision. III) To interpret the meaning of shared decision-making in mental care as perceived by patients and mental healthcare professionals. Methods: This thesis has a hermeneutical approach with an explorative design. Data were collected by means of three empirical sub-studies (Papers I, II and III), which contain in-depth interviews with 16 patients and multistage focus group interviews with eight mental healthcare professionals. Data analysis methods include qualitative content analysis (Papers I and II) and thematic interpretive analysis (Paper III). A deeper understanding of the meaning of shared decision-making was developed based on the empirical inductive findings, through deductive interpretation and finally an abductive interpretation. Findings: The first sub-study revealed the main theme thriving in relation to participating actively in a complementary ensemble of care, and the two themes having mental space to discover my way forward and being in a position to express my case. In the second sub-study, the theme was practising shared decision-making when balancing between power and responsibility to form safe care, comprising the three categories internalizing the mental healthcare professionals’ attributes, facilitating patient participation and creating a culture of trust. The third sub-study revealed the overall theme being in a space of sharing decision-making for dignified mental care, comprising the three themes engaging in a mental room of values and knowledge, relating in a process of awareness and comprehension and responding anchored in acknowledgement. The three sub-studies represented parts of a larger whole of the investigated phenomenon and a synthesis of them was developed. Through a deductive interpretation two understandings emerged; Shared decision- making - a healing process and an integral part of mental care as well as Shared decision-making - a process of understanding. The final abductive stage illuminated the comprehensive understanding: The meaning of shared decision-making in mental care is being partners with an existential responsibility. Conclusion: The meaning of shared decision-making in mental care is being partners with an existential responsibility. The relationship between a person in need of care and the carer constitutes the existential responsibility, which acknowledges the being in human beings and is essential for mental growth. The mental healthcare professionals should be the patients’ partner and supporter throughout care. This understanding conveys that shared decision-making requires great attention to emotional and relational qualities, scoping the existential dimensions in mental care.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document