Cargando…

Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration: What do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do?

Treatment Escalation Plans (TEPs) are paper and electronic components of patients' clinical record that are intended to encourage patients and caregivers to contribute in advance to decisions about treatment escalation and de-escalation at times of loss of capacity. There is now a voluminous li...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: May, Carl, Myall, Michelle, Lund, Susi, Campling, Natasha, Bogle, Sarah, Dace, Sally, Richardson, Alison
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Pergamon 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7369631/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32599414
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113143
_version_ 1783560813268697088
author May, Carl
Myall, Michelle
Lund, Susi
Campling, Natasha
Bogle, Sarah
Dace, Sally
Richardson, Alison
author_facet May, Carl
Myall, Michelle
Lund, Susi
Campling, Natasha
Bogle, Sarah
Dace, Sally
Richardson, Alison
author_sort May, Carl
collection PubMed
description Treatment Escalation Plans (TEPs) are paper and electronic components of patients' clinical record that are intended to encourage patients and caregivers to contribute in advance to decisions about treatment escalation and de-escalation at times of loss of capacity. There is now a voluminous literature on patient decision-making, but in this qualitative study of British clinicians preparing to implement a new TEP, we focus on the ways that they understood it as much more than a device to promote patient awareness of the potential for pathophysiological deterioration and to elicit their preferences about care. Working through the lens of Callon's notion of agencements, and elements of May and Finch's Normalisation Process Theory, we show how clinicians saw the TEP as an organising device that enabled translation work to elicit individual preferences and so mitigate risks associated with decision-making under stress; and transportation work to make possible procedures that would transport agreed patterns of collective action around organisations and across their boundaries and to mitigate risks that resulted from relational and informational fragmentation. The TEP promoted these shifts by making possible the restructuring of negotiated obligations between patients, caregivers, and professionals, and by restructuring practice governance through promoting rules and resources that would form expectations of professional behaviour and organisational activity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7369631
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Pergamon
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73696312020-08-01 Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration: What do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do? May, Carl Myall, Michelle Lund, Susi Campling, Natasha Bogle, Sarah Dace, Sally Richardson, Alison Soc Sci Med Article Treatment Escalation Plans (TEPs) are paper and electronic components of patients' clinical record that are intended to encourage patients and caregivers to contribute in advance to decisions about treatment escalation and de-escalation at times of loss of capacity. There is now a voluminous literature on patient decision-making, but in this qualitative study of British clinicians preparing to implement a new TEP, we focus on the ways that they understood it as much more than a device to promote patient awareness of the potential for pathophysiological deterioration and to elicit their preferences about care. Working through the lens of Callon's notion of agencements, and elements of May and Finch's Normalisation Process Theory, we show how clinicians saw the TEP as an organising device that enabled translation work to elicit individual preferences and so mitigate risks associated with decision-making under stress; and transportation work to make possible procedures that would transport agreed patterns of collective action around organisations and across their boundaries and to mitigate risks that resulted from relational and informational fragmentation. The TEP promoted these shifts by making possible the restructuring of negotiated obligations between patients, caregivers, and professionals, and by restructuring practice governance through promoting rules and resources that would form expectations of professional behaviour and organisational activity. Pergamon 2020-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7369631/ /pubmed/32599414 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113143 Text en © 2020 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
May, Carl
Myall, Michelle
Lund, Susi
Campling, Natasha
Bogle, Sarah
Dace, Sally
Richardson, Alison
Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration: What do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do?
title Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration: What do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do?
title_full Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration: What do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do?
title_fullStr Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration: What do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do?
title_full_unstemmed Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration: What do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do?
title_short Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration: What do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do?
title_sort managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration: what do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7369631/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32599414
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113143
work_keys_str_mv AT maycarl managingpatientpreferencesandclinicalresponsesinacutepathophysiologicaldeteriorationwhatdocliniciansthinktreatmentescalationplansdo
AT myallmichelle managingpatientpreferencesandclinicalresponsesinacutepathophysiologicaldeteriorationwhatdocliniciansthinktreatmentescalationplansdo
AT lundsusi managingpatientpreferencesandclinicalresponsesinacutepathophysiologicaldeteriorationwhatdocliniciansthinktreatmentescalationplansdo
AT camplingnatasha managingpatientpreferencesandclinicalresponsesinacutepathophysiologicaldeteriorationwhatdocliniciansthinktreatmentescalationplansdo
AT boglesarah managingpatientpreferencesandclinicalresponsesinacutepathophysiologicaldeteriorationwhatdocliniciansthinktreatmentescalationplansdo
AT dacesally managingpatientpreferencesandclinicalresponsesinacutepathophysiologicaldeteriorationwhatdocliniciansthinktreatmentescalationplansdo
AT richardsonalison managingpatientpreferencesandclinicalresponsesinacutepathophysiologicaldeteriorationwhatdocliniciansthinktreatmentescalationplansdo