Opportunities for addressing gaps in primary care shared decision-making with technology: a mixed-methods needs assessment

A scoping review into the explanations for differences in the degrees of shared decision making experienced by patients

OBJECTIVES

In order to improve the degree of shared decision making (SDM) experienced by patients, it is necessary to gain insight into the explanations for the differences in these degrees.

METHODS

A scoping review of the literature on the explanations for differences in the degree of SDM experienced by patients was conducted. We assessed 21,329 references. Ultimately, 308 studies were included. The explanations were divided into micro, meso, and macro levels.

RESULTS

The explanations are mainly related to the micro level. They include explanations related to the patient and healthcare professionals, the relationship between the patient and the physician, and the involvement of the patient's relatives. On the macro level, explanations are related to restrictions within the healthcare system such as time constraints, and adequate information about treatment options. On the meso level, explanations are related to the continuity of care and the involvement of other healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

SDM is not an isolated process between the physician and patient. Explanations are connected to the macro, meso, and micro levels.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This scoping review suggests that there could be more focus on explanations related to the macro and meso levels, and on how explanations at different levels are interrelated.

The impact of eHealth on relationships and trust in primary care: a review of reviews

BACKGROUND

Given the increasing integration of digital health technologies in team-based primary care, this review aimed at understanding the impact of eHealth on patient-provider and provider-provider relationships.

METHODS

A review of reviews was conducted on three databases to identify papers published in English from 2008 onwards. The impact of different types of eHealth on relationships and trust and the factors influencing the impact were thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 79 reviews were included. Patient-provider relationships were discussed more frequently as compared to provider-provider relationships. Communication systems like telemedicine were the most discussed type of technology. eHealth was found to have both positive and negative impacts on relationships and/or trust. This impact was influenced by a range of patient-related, provider-related, technology-related, and organizational factors, such as patient sociodemographics, provider communication skills, technology design, and organizational technology implementation, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations are provided for effective and equitable technology selection, application, and training to optimize the impact of eHealth on relationships and trust. The review findings can inform providers' and policymakers' decision-making around the use of eHealth in primary care delivery to facilitate relationship-building.

Adaptation of digital navigation training for integrated behavioral health providers: Interview and survey study

Despite effective treatment options, people who experience mental health conditions often do not receive needed care. E-mental health, for instance the use of mobile apps, is emerging as a way to increase access to and extend care. However, little formal training is available to increase the digital literacy level among behavioral healthcare providers (BHPs), seeking to employ such technology. The purpose of this study was to explore the acceptability and usability of an adapted in-person Digital Navigation Training (DNT) curriculum into e-Learning modules focused on the integrated environment for BHPs. BHP confidence to serve as digital navigators was also explored. E-Learning modules were adapted from an existing in-person DNT. A purposeful sampling strategy was used to recruit BHPs (n = 8) to complete the modules. Acceptability, usability, and confidence were assessed via survey and semi-structured interviews. Descriptive statistics were calculated for survey data and qualitative data were analyzed using a directed content analysis approach. BHPs who completed the training (n = 8) felt the modules were usable, enjoyed the structure, and felt the amount of time to complete the modules was acceptable. All participants thought the structure of the training worked well and enjoyed learning new information. While participants' confidence in their digital navigation skills increased, they desired more information and/or experience with screening apps prior to increasing their use of apps within their care. E-Learning modules were an acceptable method of educating BHPs with digital navigation skills. Future research is needed to explore incentives needed for training along with if participating in these modules can increase use of quality mobile apps to augment care within BHP treatment plans.

"It's a mess sometimes": patient perspectives on provider responses to healthcare costs, and how informatics interventions can help support cost-sensitive care decisions

OBJECTIVE

We investigated patient experiences with medication- and test-related cost conversations with healthcare providers to identify their preferences for future informatics tools to facilitate cost-sensitive care decisions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted 18 semistructured interviews with diverse patients (ages 24-81) in a Midwestern health system in the United States. We identified themes through 2 rounds of qualitative coding.

RESULTS

Patients believed their providers could help reduce medication-related costs but did not see how providers could influence test-related costs. Patients viewed cost conversations about medications as beneficial when providers could adjust medical recommendations or provide resources. However, cost conversations did not always occur when patients felt they were needed. Consequently, patients faced a "cascade of work" to address affordability challenges. To prevent this, collaborative informatics tools could facilitate cost conversations and shared decision-making by providing information about a patient's financial constraints, enabling comparisons of medication/testing options, and addressing transportation logistics to facilitate patient follow-through.

DISCUSSION

Like providers, patients want informatics tools that address patient out-of-pocket costs. They want to discuss healthcare costs to reduce the frequency of unaffordable costs and obtain proactive assistance. Informatics interventions could minimize the cascade of patient work through shared decision-making and preventative actions. Such tools might integrate information about efficacy, costs, and side effects to support decisions, present patient decision aids, facilitate coordination among healthcare units, and eventually improve patient outcomes.

CONCLUSION

To prevent a burdensome cascade of work for patients, informatics tools could be designed to support cost conversations and decisions between patients and providers.

Generalized shared decision making approaches and patient problems. Adapting AHRQ's SHARE Approach for Purposeful SDM

OBJECTIVE

Generalized shared decision making (SDM) describes the involvement of patients in choosing options. However, there are many situations in which patients and clinicians make decisions together that don't focus on choosing between options, e.g. problem-solving dialysis and insulin use while traveling. Poor uptake associated with clinicians' perception that SDM doesn't apply to clinical situations they face may reflect the lack of adaptation of generalized SDM approaches to patients' problems. The Purposeful SDM schema published in 2019 identifies problems for which different kinds of SDM are appropriate.

METHODS

The U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality developed SHARE as a generalized SDM approach. We sought to adapt SHARE to the different problems that patients face using a matrix to relate SHARE steps and Purposeful SDM modes and describe changes in generalized concepts and practices of SDM across these modes.

RESULTS

Many SHARE communicative behaviors applied across modes, although the meaning of SDM terms and practices, e.g. patients involved as problem solvers versus experts, varied substantially.

CONCLUSION

Aspects of SHARE require adaptation to different patient problems.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

SDM in education, practice, and tools may be supported by adapting generalized SDM approaches to patients' problems.