Exploring Provider Reactions to Decision Aid Distribution and Shared Decision Making: Lessons from Two Specialties

被引:14
|
作者
Hsu, Clarissa [1 ]
Liss, David T. [2 ]
Frosch, Dominick L. [3 ,4 ]
Westbrook, Emily O. [1 ]
Arterburn, David [1 ]
机构
[1] Grp Hlth Res Inst, 1730 Minor Ave,Ste 1600, Seattle, WA 98103 USA
[2] Northwestern Univ, Feinberg Sch Med, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[3] Palo Alto Med Fdn, Res Inst, Palo Alto, CA 94301 USA
[4] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Med, Los Angeles, CA 90024 USA
关键词
qualitative methods; decision aids; shared decision making; health service research; decision aids-tools; BREAST-CANCER SURGERY; SUPPORT INTERVENTIONS; CLINICAL-PRACTICE; PRIMARY-CARE; HEALTH; IMPLEMENTATION; ENCOUNTER; KNOWLEDGE; CHOICE;
D O I
10.1177/0272989X16671933
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background. A critical component of shared decision making (SDM) is the role played by health care providers in distributing decision aids (DAs) and initiating SDM conversations. Existing literature indicates that decisions about designing and implementing DAs must take provider perspectives into account. However, little is known about how differences in provider attitudes across specialties may impact DA implementation and how provider attitudes may shift after DA implementation. Group Health's Decision Aid Implementation project was carried out in six specialties using 12 video-based DAs for preference-sensitive conditions; this study focused on two of the six specialties. Design. In-depth, qualitative interviews with specialty care providers in two specialties-orthopedics and cardiology-at two time points during DA implementation. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. Results. We interviewed 19 care providers in orthopedics and cardiology. All respondents believed that providing patients with accurate information on their health conditions and treatment options was important and that most patients wanted an active role in decision making. However, respondents diverged in decision-making styles and views on the practicality and appropriateness of using the DAs and SDM. For example, cardiology specialists were ambivalent about DAs for coronary artery disease because many viewed DAs and SDM as unnecessary or inappropriate for this clinical condition. Provider attitudes towards DAs and SDM were generally stable over two years. Limitations. Limitations include a lack of patient perspectives, social desirability bias, and possible selection bias. Conclusions. Successfully implementing DAs in clinical practice to promote SDM requires addressing individual provider attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge of SDM by specialty. During DA development and implementation, providers should be asked for input about the specific conditions and care processes that are most appropriate for SDM.
引用
收藏
页码:113 / 126
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Shared Decision Making in Patients With Suspected Uncomplicated Ureterolithiasis: A Decision Aid Development Study
    Schoenfeld, Elizabeth M.
    Houghton, Connor
    Patel, Pooja M.
    Merwin, Leanora W.
    Poronsky, Kye P.
    Caroll, Anna L.
    Sanchez Santana, Carol
    Breslin, Maggie
    Scales, Charles D.
    Lindenauer, Peter K.
    Mazor, Kathleen M.
    Hess, Erik P.
    ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2020, 27 (07) : 554 - 565
  • [22] Exploring shared decision making in HIV nursing care
    Croston, M.
    Evans, C.
    McCluskey, J.
    HIV MEDICINE, 2016, 17 : 63 - 63
  • [23] Shared Decision-Making: Process for Design and Implementation of a Decision Aid for Patients With Craniosynostosis
    Said, Abdullah M.
    Zubovic, Ema
    Pfeifauf, Kristin D.
    Skolnick, Gary B.
    Agboada, Jude
    Acayo-Laker, Penina
    Naidoo, Sybill D.
    Politi, Mary C.
    Smyth, Matthew
    Patel, Kamlesh B.
    CLEFT PALATE CRANIOFACIAL JOURNAL, 2024, 61 (01): : 138 - 143
  • [24] Shared decision-making and the lessons learned about decision regret in cancer patients
    Chichua, Mariam
    Brivio, Eleonora
    Mazzoni, Davide
    Pravettoni, Gabriella
    SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2022, 30 (06) : 4587 - 4590
  • [25] Shared decision-making and the lessons learned about decision regret in cancer patients
    Mariam Chichua
    Eleonora Brivio
    Davide Mazzoni
    Gabriella Pravettoni
    Supportive Care in Cancer, 2022, 30 : 4587 - 4590
  • [26] Shared decision-making across the specialties: Much potential but many challenges
    Kalsi, Dilraj
    Ward, Joel
    Lee, Regent
    Fulford, Kenneth
    Handa, Ashok
    JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2019, 25 (06) : 1050 - 1054
  • [27] Physicians' reactions to uncertainty in the context of shared decision making
    Politi, Mary C.
    Legare, France
    PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2010, 80 (02) : 155 - 157
  • [28] Shared Decision Making: From Decision Science to Data Science
    Shaoibi, Azza
    Neelon, Brian
    Lenert, Leslie A.
    MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2020, 40 (03) : 254 - 265
  • [29] Health Care Provider Perspectives on Shared Decision Making With Parents and Adolescents
    Lipstein, Ellen A.
    Pallotto, Isabella K.
    Anderson, Chelsey B.
    Ammon, Mary Anne
    Carle, Adam C.
    CLINICAL PEDIATRICS, 2024,
  • [30] Provider insights on shared decision-making with families affected by CHD
    Pinto, Nelangi M.
    Patel, Angira
    Delaney, Rebecca K.
    Donofrio, Mary T.
    Marino, Bradley S.
    Miller, Stephen
    Ozanne, Elissa M.
    Zickmund, Susan L.
    Karasawa, Michelle H.
    Pershing, Mandy L.
    Fagerlin, Angela
    CARDIOLOGY IN THE YOUNG, 2022, 32 (09) : 1475 - 1482