4.5 Article

Shared decision making process measures and patient problems

期刊

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
卷 105, 期 7, 页码 2457-2465

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2021.11.001

关键词

Shared decision making; SDM; Purposeful SDM; Patient centered care; Measurement

资金

  1. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) [UL1 TR002377]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to identify how current observer-based shared decision-making measures apply to each mode of purposeful shared decision-making. The results show that the existing measures can describe behaviors applicable to all modes, but lack items sensitive to behaviors particular to some specific modes.
Objectives: Purposeful SDM posits four modes of shared decision making (SDM). The use of each mode depends on the type of problem of care that is being addressed. We sought to identify how current observer-based SDM measures apply to each mode of Purposeful SDM.Methods: Four coders, working independently, evaluated 192 items pertaining to 12 observer-based SDM process measures. They classified the items into 6 themes that vary across Purposeful SDM modes and then into one of the four modes (weighing, negotiating, problem-solving, developing insight). Disagreements were resolved by consensus.Results: The items were classified as pertaining to the following themes: problem (28), roles/participation (84), options (62), preferences (21), decision (15), and evaluation (6). They were then classified as pertaining particularly to the SDM modes of weighing (54), negotiating (5), problem-solving (0), and developing insight (0) modes, with 191 items applying broadly to all modes of Purposeful SDM.Conclusions: Observer-based SDM measures describe behaviors pertinent to all modes but lack items sensitive to behaviors particular to some modes of SDM. Practice Implications: New or revised observer-based measures of the SDM process could help estimate the extent to which the appropriate SDM mode is being used to address the patient's problem.(c) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据