Shared Decision Making in the Safety Net: Where Do We Go from Here?

被引:9
作者
Bouma, Angelique B. [1 ,4 ]
Tiedje, Kristina [3 ]
Poplau, Sara [1 ]
Boehm, Deborah H. [1 ,2 ]
Shah, Nilay D. [5 ]
Commers, Matthew J. [4 ]
Linzer, Mark [1 ,6 ]
Montori, Victor M. [5 ]
机构
[1] Minneapolis Med Res Fdn Inc, Dept Med, Minneapolis, MN USA
[2] Hennepin Cty Med Ctr, Div Gen Internal Med, Minneapolis, MN 55415 USA
[3] Univ Lumiere, Dept Sociol & Anthropol, Lyon, France
[4] Maastricht Univ, CAPHRI Sch Publ Hlth & Primary Care, Dept Int Hlth, Maastricht, Netherlands
[5] Mayo Clin, Dept Hlth Sci Res, Knowledge & Evaluat Res Unit, Rochester, MN USA
[6] Univ Minnesota, Dept Med, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
基金
美国医疗保健研究与质量局;
关键词
Patient Preference; Safety Net Clinics; Shared Decision Making; PRIMARY-CARE;
D O I
10.3122/jabfm.2014.02.130245
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background: Shared decision making (SDM) is an interactive process between clinicians and patients in which both share information, deliberate together, and make clinical decisions. Clinics serving safety net patients face special challenges, including fewer resources and more challenging work environments. The use of SDM within safety net institutions has not been well studied. Methods: We recruited a convenience sample of 15 safety net primary care clinicians (13 physicians, 2 nurse practitioners). Each answered a 9-item SDM questionnaire and participated in a semistructured interview. From the transcribed interviews and questionnaire data, we identified themes and suggestions for introducing SDM into a safety net environment. Results: Clinicians reported only partially fulfilling the central components of SDM (sharing information, deliberating, and decision making). Most clinicians expressed interest in SDM by stating that they "selected a treatment option together" with patients (8 of 15 in strong or complete agreement), but only a minority (3 of 15) "thoroughly weighed the different treatment options" together with patients. Clinicians attributed this gap to many barriers, including time pressure, overwhelming visit content, patient preferences, and lack of available resources. All clinicians believed that lack of time made it difficult to practice SDM. Conclusions: To increase use of SDM in the safety net, efficient SDM interventions designed for this environment, team care, and patient engagement in SDM will need further development. Future studies should focus on adapting SDM to safety net settings and determine whether SDM can reduce health care disparities.
引用
收藏
页码:292 / 294
页数:3
相关论文
共 5 条
[1]   The 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Development and psychometric properties in a primary care sample [J].
Kriston, Levente ;
Scholl, Isabelle ;
Hoelzel, Lars ;
Simon, Daniela ;
Loh, Andreas ;
Haerter, Martin .
PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2010, 80 (01) :94-99
[2]   Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: Update of a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions [J].
Legare, France ;
Ratte, Stephane ;
Gravel, Karine ;
Graham, Ian D. .
PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2008, 73 (03) :526-535
[3]   Shared decision making in cancer screening and treatment decisions for american indian and alaska native communities: Can we ethically calibrate interventions to patients' values? [J].
Katherine E. Nowakowski ;
Jon C. Tilburt ;
Judith S. Kaur .
Journal of Cancer Education, 2012, 27 (4) :790-792
[4]   Are There Racial Differences in Patients' Shared Decision-Making Preferences and Behaviors among Patients with Diabetes? [J].
Peek, Monica E. ;
Tang, Hui ;
Cargill, Algernon ;
Chin, Marshall H. .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2011, 31 (03) :422-431
[5]   Separate and Unequal Clinics Where Minority and Nonminority Patients Receive Primary Care [J].
Varkey, Anita B. ;
Manwell, Linda Baier ;
Williams, Eric S. ;
Ibrahim, Said A. ;
Brown, Roger L. ;
Bobula, James A. ;
Horner-Ibler, Barbara A. ;
Schwartz, Mark D. ;
Konrad, Thomas R. ;
Wiltshire, Jacqueline C. ;
Linzer, Mark .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2009, 169 (03) :243-250