Characteristics of shared decision making in Romania from the patient perspective: A cross-sectional multicentric study

Shared decision making in the treatment of pediatric strabismus

PURPOSE

To quantify the results of shared decision making in pediatric strabismus surgery from the parent perspective using the nine-item Shared Decision Making (SDM) Questionnaire and the associations of SDM score with parental education level; secondarily, to evaluate postoperative parental satisfaction as a function of child age, parental education level, SDM scores, and motor outcomes.

METHODS

Consecutive parents of children 2-14 years of age with concomitant manifest strabismus that consented to strabismus surgery were surveyed using the SDM Questionnaire. A four-point Likert scale was used to gauge the level of postoperative satisfaction (POS). Potential predictors were estimated in multivariable regression analysis, with results adjusted for education level, children's age, and motor outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 100 parents (86 women) completed the survey and were included. Significant differences for SDM score were found between individuals with university-level versus the other three educational levels (P < 0.001 for primary and secondary levels; P = 0.017 for college or lyceum level). Categorical regression analysis showed that POS level was inversely correlated with education level and positively correlated with SDM score. Children's age at time of surgery and postoperative motor outcome were not significantly associated with POS.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study cohort, SDM score was correlated with educational level. Satisfaction was greater among responders with higher SDM scores, indicating that SDM may help improve parent-reported satisfaction with treatment results.

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 Case of a 44-Year-Old Survivor of Unrepaired Tetralogy of Fallot, Right Aortic Arch and Abdominal Aortopulmonary Collateral Vessels

The most common congenital cyanotic heart disease is described in the literature as the Tetralogy of Fallot. This abnormality is characterized by the presence of ventricular septal defect (VSD), obstruction of the right ventricular (RV) outflow tract, right ventricular hypertrophy, and overriding aorta. In patients with pulmonary atresia with ventricular septal defect (PA/VSD), major aortopulmonary collateral arteries (MAPCA) are common; however, although some of them do not have PA/VSD, they do have other particular anatomical variants. The case we are presenting in this article is a rare mild symptomatic adult noncorrected TOF, with preserved RV function, right aortic arch, and MAPCAs (“classic” thoracic MAPCAs but also abdominal MAPCAs). The anatomy of a complex congenital defect is well illustrated by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and computer tomography angiography (CTA), and these imaging techniques are mostly used to understand the relative clinical “silence” TOF. Imaging scans thus play a key role in the evaluation of these patients, being very important to know the indications and limitations of each method, but also to learn to combine them with each other depending on the clinical picture of the patient’s presentation. Additionally, the close collaboration between clinicians and imagers is essential for a correct, complete and detailed preoperative evaluation, being subsequently essential for cardiovascular surgeons, the whole team thus deciding the best therapeutic management.

Patient Perspectives on Factors Affecting Direct Oral Anticoagulant Use for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation

INTRODUCTION

Oral anticoagulant therapy choices for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) expanded in the last decade with the introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). However, the implementation of DOACs was slow and varied across different health economies in England. There is limited evidence on the patient role in the uptake of new medicines, including DOACs, apart from considering their demographic and clinical characteristics. Hence, this study aimed to address the gap by exploring the view of patients with AF on factors affecting DOAC use.

METHODS

A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews was conducted in three health economies in the North of England. Adult patients (>18 years) diagnosed with non-valvular AF, prescribed an oral anticoagulant (vitamin K antagonist or DOAC), and able to give written consent were recruited. Data were collected between August 2018 and April 2019. Audio recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using the framework method.

RESULTS

Four themes with eleven subthemes discussed identified factors affecting the use of DOACs. They were linked to limited healthcare financial and workforce resources, patient involvement in decision-making, patient knowledge about DOACs, safety concerns about oral anticoagulants, and oral anticoagulant therapy impact on patients' daily lives. Lack of a) opportunities to voice patient preferences and b) information on available therapy options resulted in some patients experiencing difficulties with the prescribed therapy. This was reported to cause negative impact on their daily lives, adherence, and overall satisfaction with the therapy.

CONCLUSION

Greater patient involvement in decision-making could prevent and resolve difficulties encountered by some patients and potentially improve outcomes plus increase the uptake of DOACs.

Shared decision making and patients satisfaction with strabismus care-a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Strabismus is a complex disease that has various treatment approaches each with its own advantages and drawbacks. In this context, shared decisions making (SDM) is a communication process with the provider sharing all the relevant treatment alternatives, all the benefits, and risks of each procedure, while the patient shares all the preferences and values regarding his/her choices. In that way, SDM is a bidirectional process that goes beyond the typical informed consent. Therefore, it is known a little of the extent to which SDM influences the satisfaction with the treatment outcome along with strabismus patients. To study this correlation, an SDM-Q-9 questionnaire was provided within surgical consultations where treatment decisions were made; the SDM-Q-9 aims to assess the relationship between the post-operative patient's satisfaction and their SMD score.

METHODS

The study is considered a prospective observational pilot study. Eligible patients were adult patients diagnosed with strabismus, who had multiple treatment options, were given at the right of choice without being driven into a physician's preference. Ninety-three strabismus patients were asked to fill out the SDM-Q-9 questionnaire related to their perception of SDM during the entire period of strabismus treatment. After the treatment, patients were asked to rate their satisfaction level with the surgical outcome as excellent, good, fair, and poor. Descriptive statistics and the linear regression statistical tests (Spearman, Mann Whitney U, and Kriskal-Wallis) were used as analysis tools.

RESULTS

The average age of the participants was 24, where 50.6% were women. The mean SDM-Q-9 score among patients was 32 (IQR = 3). The postoperative patient satisfaction was rated as being excellent by 16 (17.2%) patients, good by 38 (40.9%), fair by 32 (34.4%), and poor by 7 patients (7.5%). Data analysis by linear regression statistical tests showed a positive correlation between the SDM-Q-9 score and the patient satisfaction related to the surgery outcome (B = 0.005, p < 0.001). Criteria in assessing patients' satisfaction were age, gender, and strabismus type. A positive correlation between SDM and real satisfaction (r = 0.834, p < 0.01) was found with age, and no significant relationship was found while taking into consideration the responder's gender and the strabismus type.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessing patient satisfaction after choosing a treatment for strabismus method helped us evaluate the gaps in constructive dialogue that would lead to a positive outcome for both patient and clinician. The correlation between the SDM process and the patients' satisfaction with surgery outcome, adjusted by age, has been established. These findings can serve as a springboard to further communicative improvements related to the SDM process and between patients and physicians, thereby consequently leading to patients' satisfaction raise in strabismus care. The study underlines the importance of further analysis and validation of on-ground interactions among the adolescent and adult patients and the clinicians across the strabismus management trajectory. A multicentral study and its validation will follow.

Shared Decision Making and Patient-Centered Care in Israel, Jordan, and the United States: Exploratory and Comparative Survey Study of Physician Perceptions

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is a health communication model that evolved in Europe and North America and largely reflects the values and medical practices dominant in these areas.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to understand the beliefs, perceptions, and practices related to SDM and patient-centered care (PCC) of physicians in Israel, Jordan, and the United States.

METHODS

A hypothesis-generating comparative survey study was administered to physicians from Israel, Jordan, and the United States.

RESULTS

A total of 36 surveys were collected via snowball sampling (Jordan: n=15; United States: n=12; Israel: n=9). SDM was perceived as a way to inform patients and allow them to participate in their care. Barriers to implementing SDM varied based on place of origin; physicians in the United States mentioned limited time, physicians in Jordan reported that a lack of patient education limits SDM practices, and physicians in Israel reported lack of communication training. Most US physicians defined PCC as a practice for prioritizing patient preferences, whereas both Jordanian and Israeli physicians defined PCC as a holistic approach to care and to prioritizing patient needs. Barriers to implementing PCC, as seen by US physicians, were mostly centered on limited appointment time and insurance coverage. In Jordan and Israel, staff shortage and a lack of resources in the system were seen as major barriers to PCC implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The study adds to the limited, yet important, literature on SDM and PCC in areas of the world outside the United States, Canada, Australia, and Western Europe. The study suggests that perceptions of PCC might widely differ among these regions, whereas concepts of SDM might be shared. Future work should clarify these differences.

[Not Available]

There is now broad agreement that ideas like person-centred care, patient expertise and shared decision-making are no longer peripheral to health discourse, fine ideals or merely desirable additions to sound, scientific clinical practice. Rather, their incorporation into our thinking and planning of health and social care is essential if we are to respond adequately to the problems that confront us: they need to be seen not as "ethical add-ons" but core components of any genuinely integrated, realistic and conceptually sound account of healthcare practice. This, the tenth philosophy thematic edition of the journal, presents papers conducting urgent research into the social context of scientific knowledge and the significance of viewing clinical knowledge not as something that "sits within the minds" of researchers and practitioners, but as a relational concept, the product of social interactions. It includes papers on the nature of reasoning and evidence, the on-going problems of how to 'integrate' different forms of scientific knowledge with broader, humanistic understandings of reasoning and judgement, patient and community perspectives. Discussions of the epistemological contribution of patient perspectives to the nature of care, and the crucial and still under-developed role of phenomenology in medical epistemology, are followed by a broad range of papers focussing on shared decision-making, analysing its proper meaning, its role in policy, methods for realising it and its limitations in real-world contexts.