Practitioners' views on shared decision-making implementation: A qualitative study

Integrating Shared Decision-Making into Undergraduate Oncology Education: A Pedagogical Framework

The integration of shared decision-making (SDM) into undergraduate oncology education represents a critical evolution in medical pedagogy, reflecting the growing complexity and patient-centric focus of contemporary healthcare. This paper introduces a comprehensive pedagogical framework designed to embed SDM within the undergraduate medical curriculum, particularly in oncology, where the multiplicity of treatment options and their profound impact on patient life underscore the necessity of this approach. Grounded in a systematic literature review and aligned with established educational theories, this framework proposes twelve strategic approaches to cultivate future physicians proficient in both clinical acumen and patient-collaborative decision-making. The framework emphasizes real-world clinical experience, role-playing, case studies, and decision aids to deepen students' understanding of SDM. It advocates for the development of communication skills, ethical deliberation, and cultural competence, recognizing the multifaceted nature of patient care. The inclusion of patient narratives and evidence-based decision-making further enriches the curriculum, offering a holistic view of patient care. Additionally, the integration of digital tools within the SDM process acknowledges the evolving technological landscape in healthcare. The paper also addresses challenges in implementing this framework, such as curricular constraints and the need for educator training. It underscores the importance of continual evaluation and adaptation of these strategies to the dynamic field of medical education and practice. Overall, this comprehensive approach aims not only to enhance the quality of oncological care but also to prepare medical students for the complexities of modern medicine, where patient involvement in decision-making is both a necessity and an expectation.

Through Clinicians Eyes: Use of an In-consultation Patient Decision Aid in Radiation Treatment for Early Breast Cancer. A Qualitative Study

INTRODUCTION

Shared decision making (SDM) has become a crucial element on the political agenda and represents a vital aspect of modern healthcare. However, successful implementation of SDM highly depends on the attitude of clinicians towards SDM. The overall aim of our study was to explore the experience of oncologists and nurses with SDM using the Decision Helper, an in-consultation decision aid, at four Danish radiotherapy departments.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 clinicians. The participants were selected using purposive sampling to include nurses and oncologists, male and female, with different levels of experience with SDM and clinical work. The analysis was a data-driven, iterative process with inductive coding of all interviews and meaning condensation.

RESULTS

Two main themes emerged: "Using the Decision Helper changes the consultation" and "Change of attitude among Danish oncologists." Each of the two themes included four elaborative subthemes, which are reported with supporting citations in this paper. In brief, the use of SDM and the Decision Helper should ideally be adjusted to the individual patient and depends highly on the oncologist. The participants described ambitions towards "making the right decision for this patient at this time." The healthcare system, however, has pitfalls that may hinder SDM, e.g., rigid interpretation of guideline-based recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Using an in-consultation Decision Helper has the potential for individualized, structured patient engagement in decision making. There is a need for patient decision aids in clinical guidelines to ensure patient engagement in decision making.

Identifying Womens' Needs in Making a Treatment Decision for Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Qualitative Study

Background

Choosing a treatment option for female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a preference-sensitive decision. Nowadays, shared decision making (SDM) is the preferred way of decision making. SDM considers the needs patients have regarding the decision-making process. The aim of this study was to identify decisional needs of women who are making a treatment decision for SUI.

Materials and Methods

Semistructured interviews were planned with women who had been seeking treatment for SUI. Patients were recruited in two teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. Interviewers used a topic list based on the Ottawa decision support framework. The interviews were transcribed and coded. Themes and subthemes of factors relating to the treatment decision-making process were identified and described.

Results

We interviewed a total of 16 women. Four major themes of SUI patients' needs were identified: information on disorder and treatment, SDM, personalized health care, and consideration for social context. Within these themes, specific needs varied between individuals. In addition to the provision of objective information, other important identified needs were subjective, such as acknowledgment of symptoms and feeling understood by a physician. It was important for patients that they had a sufficient amount of time to make their decision.

Conclusions

To ensure a good quality treatment decision in female SUI, several topics need to be addressed in an SDM process. The themes of decisional needs identified in this study can help improve the decision-making process.

eHealth competence building for future doctors and nurses - Attitudes and capabilities

BACKGROUND

Digitalisation is rapidly changing health care processes and the health care sector, thus increasing the need to improve the digital competence of future health care professionals.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to describe the attitudes of medical and nursing students towards digital health based on self-evaluation as well as to compare the differences in perceptions between the two student groups.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted as an online survey using the Webropol in April 2021 at the University of Oulu and Oulu University of Applied Sciences in Finland. The survey questionnaire consisted of seven background questions and 16 statements on a five-point Likert scale (fully disagree to fully agree) to survey student attitudes towards eHealth, and their digital capabilities.

RESULTS

A total of 250 medical and nursing students were invited to participate in the study and 170 of them took the survey (response rate 68 %). Of those answered, 38 % (n = 64) were nursing and 32 % (n = 106) medical students. Students generally had a positive attitude towards eHealth and health care digitalisation. The differences in perceptions and preparedness between medical and nursing students were surprisingly small in the two student groups. There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in three out of 16 statements: these were related to changes in the roles of health care professionals and patients as well as the students' knowledge of information contained in the national patient portal.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study provide a good starting point for further harmonisation of the curriculum for both health professional groups regarding the teaching of eHealth and telemedicine.

Learning from the implementation of clinical empathy training: an explorative qualitative study in search of the barriers and facilitators

BACKGROUND

Amid concerns about the decline of empathy during the clinical training of medical clerks, evidence that empathy improves patient outcomes suggests some potential for teaching empathy in ways that will affect the knowledge, attitude and behaviour of medical clerks. This potential alone cannot, however, guarantee the success of educational innovations to introduce empathy to the medical curriculum. This research aims to identify the barriers and facilitators of the implementation of a specific clinical initiative to enhance the empathy skills of clerks, namely the training of clerks to act as a 'MedGezel' or 'medical coach'.

METHOD

We conducted an explorative qualitative study based on interview data collected and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis and the readiness for change theory. We conducted semi-structured interviews with relevant stakeholders in this particular qualitative study. Thematic analysis was based on open and axial coding using ATLAS.ti 9, which facilitated the emergence of common themes of interest and meaning for the study.

RESULTS

A total of 13 relevant stakeholders participated as interviewees in our study. The data was collected from April to June 2021. Our analysis generated 6 main themes which can provide insights into why the implementation of the MedGezel educational innovation failed so far. The following themes emerged: the case for change: why change?; practical necessity; leadership; management and resources; staff culture; and alignment with the corporate strategy.

DISCUSSION

The implementation failure can be partially explained as resulting from the personal attitudes and choices of participants, who struggled to reconcile a vision that they liked with side effects that they feared. While participants repeatedly mentioned management and leadership issues, these organizational issues seemed less important as they could be easily resolved in practice. What was more important and fatal for the initiative was its lack of alignment with staff culture, despite its alignment with corporate strategy.

CONCLUSION

This investigation into the barriers and facilitators influencing the implementation of the MedGezel program identified 6 explanatory themes, the most impactful one being staff culture.

Cascade of decisions meet personal preferences in sciatica treatment decisions

STUDY DESIGN

An in-depth interview study including patients, general practitioners, neurologists and neurosurgeons.

OBJECTIVE

To gain insight in decision-making in sciatica care, by identifying patients' and physicians' preferences for treatment options, and the differences between and within both groups.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Sciatica is a self-limiting condition, which can be treated both conservatively and surgically. The value of both options has been disputed, and the care pathway is known for a substantial amount of practice variation. Most Dutch patients are taken care of by general practitioners before they are referred to hospital-based neurologists, who might refer to a neurosurgeon, who can perform a surgical intervention. Dutch sciatica care thus follows the principles of stepped care, and a cascade of decisions precedes surgery. Better understanding of the decision-making within this cascade might reveal opportunities to improve shared decision-making and to reduce unwarranted practice variation.

METHODS

Interviews with 10 patients and 22 physicians were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

While physicians were confident of their clinical diagnosis, patients preferred confirmation trough imaging to exclude other possible explanations. Furthermore, many patients showed reluctance towards the use of (strong) opioids, while all physicians favoured this and underlined the benefits of opioids in the management of sciatica complaints, to buy time and to allow patients to recover naturally. Finally, individual physicians differed strongly in their opinion on benefits and optimal timing of surgical treatment and epidural injections.

CONCLUSIONS

Dutch sciatica care is characterised by a cascade of decisions preceding surgery. Preferences differ within and between patients and physicians, which adds to the practice variation. To improve decision-making, physicians and patients should invest not necessarily more in the exchange of options or preferences, but in making sure the other understands the rationale behind them.

Development of a Patient Decision Aid to Support Shared Decision Making for Patients with Recurrent High-Grade Glioma

When high-grade gliomas recur, patients, their families, and clinicians face difficult medical decisions. There is no curable treatment, and the treatment options all come with a risk of complications and adverse effects. The patients are often cognitively affected, and they need tailored decision support. The objective of this study was to develop a patient decision aid (PtDA) targeted at patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas. Based on existing knowledge and the International Patient Decision Aids Standards, the PtDA was developed through an iterative process. The PtDA was alpha-tested by potential users to assess its acceptability and usability. The development team comprised three clinicians, two patients, two family members, and a researcher. The fifth version of the PtDA was submitted to the alpha test. Eleven patients, nine family members, and eleven clinicians assessed the PtDA and found it acceptable. Three changes were made during the alpha test. Most participants perceived the PtDA to prepare patients for decision making and improve consultations. The involvement of potential users was emphasized during the development and alpha test process. The PtDA was assessed as useful and acceptable by patients, family members, and clinicians in the decision-making situation of recurrent high-grade glioma.

Treatment and secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) adversely affects the quality of life and survival of people with cancer. A holistic approach is optimal for the treatment and secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) including shared decision-making around anticoagulation, considering individual risk factors for VTE recurrence, morbidities from VTE, and resources available in cancer centres around the world. Taking a global perspective on availability and cost, this paper guides the reader through the wider aspects of treatment and secondary thromboprophylaxis which, in turn, influence the recent international guidelines.