Cargando…

Elicitation of preferences in the second half of the shared decision making process needs attention; a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: It is known that the use of a Patient Decision Aid (PtDA), combined with advice for professionals on how and when to use it, can enhance the involvement of patients in the treatment decision. However, we need more knowledge with respect to the intention-behaviour gap. This study aims to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Savelberg, W., Smidt, M., Boersma, L. J., van der Weijden, T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7346491/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32646422
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05476-z
_version_ 1783556418728624128
author Savelberg, W.
Smidt, M.
Boersma, L. J.
van der Weijden, T.
author_facet Savelberg, W.
Smidt, M.
Boersma, L. J.
van der Weijden, T.
author_sort Savelberg, W.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: It is known that the use of a Patient Decision Aid (PtDA), combined with advice for professionals on how and when to use it, can enhance the involvement of patients in the treatment decision. However, we need more knowledge with respect to the intention-behaviour gap. This study aims to analyse patients’ experiences with the Shared Decision Making (SDM) process to find clues to close this gap. METHODS: This qualitative study was part of a pilot study aiming to implement SDM in early adopter breast cancer teams. Patients were given access to a personalised PtDA. Breast cancer teams were instructed on how and when to deliver the PtDA. We interviewed 20 patients about their experience with the PtDA and SDM in general. RESULTS: Most patients experienced SDM, though to a certain extent. Choice talk and option talk were commonly experienced, however the elicitation of preferences and decision talk was rare. The PtDA was used by the majority of patients (N = 13), all indicating that it was useful, especially to recall all the information given. Patients appreciated the contribution of breast cancer nurses in the SDM process. They considered them as true case managers, easy to approach and supportive. CONCLUSION: Although patients felt well-informed and satisfied about risk-communication, the elicitation of preferences appeared very limited to non-existent. We recommend that breast cancer teams divide tasks in the SDM process and reallocate the elicitation of preferences to the nurses in a well-defined clinical pathway.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7346491
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73464912020-07-14 Elicitation of preferences in the second half of the shared decision making process needs attention; a qualitative study Savelberg, W. Smidt, M. Boersma, L. J. van der Weijden, T. BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: It is known that the use of a Patient Decision Aid (PtDA), combined with advice for professionals on how and when to use it, can enhance the involvement of patients in the treatment decision. However, we need more knowledge with respect to the intention-behaviour gap. This study aims to analyse patients’ experiences with the Shared Decision Making (SDM) process to find clues to close this gap. METHODS: This qualitative study was part of a pilot study aiming to implement SDM in early adopter breast cancer teams. Patients were given access to a personalised PtDA. Breast cancer teams were instructed on how and when to deliver the PtDA. We interviewed 20 patients about their experience with the PtDA and SDM in general. RESULTS: Most patients experienced SDM, though to a certain extent. Choice talk and option talk were commonly experienced, however the elicitation of preferences and decision talk was rare. The PtDA was used by the majority of patients (N = 13), all indicating that it was useful, especially to recall all the information given. Patients appreciated the contribution of breast cancer nurses in the SDM process. They considered them as true case managers, easy to approach and supportive. CONCLUSION: Although patients felt well-informed and satisfied about risk-communication, the elicitation of preferences appeared very limited to non-existent. We recommend that breast cancer teams divide tasks in the SDM process and reallocate the elicitation of preferences to the nurses in a well-defined clinical pathway. BioMed Central 2020-07-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7346491/ /pubmed/32646422 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05476-z Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Savelberg, W.
Smidt, M.
Boersma, L. J.
van der Weijden, T.
Elicitation of preferences in the second half of the shared decision making process needs attention; a qualitative study
title Elicitation of preferences in the second half of the shared decision making process needs attention; a qualitative study
title_full Elicitation of preferences in the second half of the shared decision making process needs attention; a qualitative study
title_fullStr Elicitation of preferences in the second half of the shared decision making process needs attention; a qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Elicitation of preferences in the second half of the shared decision making process needs attention; a qualitative study
title_short Elicitation of preferences in the second half of the shared decision making process needs attention; a qualitative study
title_sort elicitation of preferences in the second half of the shared decision making process needs attention; a qualitative study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7346491/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32646422
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05476-z
work_keys_str_mv AT savelbergw elicitationofpreferencesinthesecondhalfoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessneedsattentionaqualitativestudy
AT smidtm elicitationofpreferencesinthesecondhalfoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessneedsattentionaqualitativestudy
AT boersmalj elicitationofpreferencesinthesecondhalfoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessneedsattentionaqualitativestudy
AT vanderweijdent elicitationofpreferencesinthesecondhalfoftheshareddecisionmakingprocessneedsattentionaqualitativestudy