Through the Eyes of Patients: The Effect of Training General Practitioners and Nurses on Perceived Shared Decision-Making Support

被引:1
作者
Bos-van den Hoek, Danique W. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Smets, Ellen M. A. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Ali, Rania [2 ]
Tange, Dorien [5 ]
van Laarhoven, Hanneke W. M. [4 ,6 ]
Henselmans, Inge [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Amsterdam Univ Med Ctr Locat, Dept Med Psychol, POB 22660, NL-1100 DD Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Univ Amsterdam, Dept Med Psychol, Amsterdam UMC Locat, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Amsterdam Publ Hlth Res Inst, Qual Care Program, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[4] Canc Ctr Amsterdam, Canc Treatment & Qual Life, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[5] Dutch Federat Canc Patient Org NFK, Utrecht, Netherlands
[6] Univ Amsterdam, Dept Med Psychol, Amsterdam UMC Locat, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[7] Univ Amsterdam, Dept Gen Practice, Amsterdam UMC Locat, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
shared decision making; continuing education; palliative care; neoplasms; patients; cancer survivors; general practitioners; nurses; communication; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; CANCER CARE; VIDEO VIGNETTES; COMMUNICATION; SATISFACTION; ENCOUNTER; INFORM; MODELS;
D O I
10.1177/0272989X231203693
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose. To examine the effects of training general practitioners and nurses in shared decision-making (SDM) support as perceived by cancer patients and survivors. Design. An innovative, experimental design was adopted that included analogue patients (APs), that is, people who have or have had cancer and who imagine themselves in the position of the actor-patient presented in a video. Each AP assessed a video-recorded simulated consultation of a health care professional (HCP) conducted before or after an SDM support training program. The primary outcome was the APs' perceived SDM support with 13 self-developed items reflecting the perceived patient benefit of SDM support as well as the perceived HCP support behavior. Secondary outcomes included an overall rating of SDM support, AP-reported extent of SDM (CollaboRATE), satisfaction with the communication (Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire), conversation appreciation and helpfulness, as well as decision-making satisfaction and confidence (visual analog scale, 0-100). In addition, patient and HCP characteristics associated with AP-perceived SDM support were examined. Results. APs (n = 131) did not significantly differentiate trained from untrained HCPs in their perceptions of SDM support nor in secondary outcomes. Agreement between APs' perceptions was poor. The higher the perceived comparability of the consultation with APs' previous personal experiences, the higher their rating of SDM support. Limitations. We used a nonvalidated primary outcome and an innovative study design that should be tested in future work. Conclusions. Despite the limitations of the study design, the training seemed to not affect cancer patients' and survivors' perceived SDM support. Implications. The clinical relevance of the training on SDM support needs to be established. The variation in APs' assessments suggests patients differ in their perception of SDM support, stressing the importance of patient-tailored SDM support.
引用
收藏
页码:76 / 88
页数:13
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]   Using anchor-based methods to determine the smallest effect size of interest [J].
Anvari, Farid ;
Lakens, Daniel .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2021, 96
[2]   Experimental Vignette Studies in Survey Research [J].
Atzmueller, Christiane ;
Steiner, Peter M. .
METHODOLOGY-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RESEARCH METHODS FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES, 2010, 6 (03) :128-138
[3]   The Psychometric Properties of CollaboRATE: A Fast and Frugal Patient-Reported Measure of the Shared Decision-Making Process [J].
Barr, Paul James ;
Thompson, Rachel ;
Walsh, Thom ;
Grande, Stuart W. ;
Ozanne, Elissa M. ;
Elwyn, Glyn .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2014, 16 (01)
[4]   Nurse-led coaching of shared decision-making for women with ductal carcinoma in situ in breast care centers: A cluster randomized controlled trial [J].
Berger-Hoeger, Birte ;
Liethmann, Katrin ;
Muehlhauser, Ingrid ;
Haastert, Burkhard ;
Steckelberg, Anke .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING STUDIES, 2019, 93 :141-152
[5]   Can Naive Viewers Put Themselves in the Patients' Shoes? Reliability and Validity of the Analogue Patient Methodology [J].
Blanch-Hartigan, Danielle ;
Hall, Judith A. ;
Krupat, Edward ;
Irish, Julie T. .
MEDICAL CARE, 2013, 51 (03) :E16-E21
[6]  
BLANCHARD CG, 1986, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V58, P387, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(19860715)58:2<387::AID-CNCR2820580233>3.0.CO
[7]  
2-3
[8]   Evaluation of a shared decision making educational program: The Ottawa Decision Support Tutorial [J].
Boland, Laura ;
Legare, France ;
Carley, Meg ;
Graham, Ian D. ;
O'Connor, Annette M. ;
Lawson, Margaret L. ;
Stacey, Dawn .
PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2019, 102 (02) :324-331
[9]   Key components of shared decision making models: a systematic review [J].
Bomhof-Roordink, Hanna ;
Gartner, Fania R. ;
Stiggelbout, Anne M. ;
Pieterse, Arwen H. .
BMJ OPEN, 2019, 9 (12)
[10]   A blended learning for general practitioners and nurses on skills to support shared decision-making with patients about palliative cancer treatment: A one-group pre-posttest study [J].
Bos-van den Hoek, Danique W. ;
Smets, Ellen M. A. ;
Ali, Rania ;
Baas-Thijssen, Monique C. M. ;
Bomhof-Roordink, Hanna ;
Helsper, Charles W. ;
Stacey, Dawn ;
Tange, Dorien ;
van Laarhoven, Hanneke W. M. ;
Henselmans, Inge .
PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2023, 112