3.8 Article

Assessing Shared Decision-Making in Cystic Fibrosis Care Using collaboRATE: A Cross-Sectional Study of 159 Programs

Journal

JOURNAL OF PATIENT EXPERIENCE
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/23743735211034032

Keywords

shared decision-making; communication; cystic fibrosis; chronic care; patient experience

Funding

  1. CF Foundation [ELWYN18QI0]
  2. CF Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated shared decision-making (SDM) experiences in cystic fibrosis (CF) care programs in the United States, finding that pediatric programs had higher rates of SDM. Multivariable logistic regression analyses showed relationships between SDM and patient age, general health, and mental health.
There are numerous opportunities for shared decision-making (SDM) in cystic fibrosis (CF) care, yet little is known about patients' SDM experiences. This study evaluated SDM across 159 CF care programs (4024 participants) in the United States. Shared decision-making was assessed using the patient-reported collaboRATE measure, which was included in the CF Foundation's Patient and Family Experience of Care Survey over 18 months. Overall, 69% of respondents reported experiencing SDM. Respondents at pediatric programs were more likely to experience SDM than those at adult programs (72% vs 67%, P < .001). Multivariable logistic regression analyses showed a relationship between SDM and patient age, whereby SDM was less likely to occur with patients aged 18 to 24 years, compared to some younger and older age groups (P = .02-<.001). Shared decision-making was more likely to occur at pediatric programs when patients had better general health (P = .02-<.01), and at pediatric and adult programs when patients had better mental health (P = .02-<.001). Disparities in SDM experiences highlight a need to improve decision-making processes in CF care. Interventions tailored for improving SDM among specific patient populations may be particularly advantageous.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available