Literature DB >> 10463548

Impact of patient acuity on preference for information and autonomy in decision making.

M A Davis1, J R Hoffman, J Hsu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To test the hypotheses that ED patients' desires for medical information and for autonomy in decision making are inversely related to increasing acuity of illness, increasing age, and lower level of formal education.
METHODS: The authors conducted a prospective study of ED patients who presented for care during seven nonconsecutive 24-hour periods. Of 804 patients approached, 665 completed a questionnaire that was administered by a trained research assistant. Patients rated their desire for medical information, and for participation in medical decision making, on two 10-cm visual analog scales. Patient acuity level was determined in routine fashion by trained triage nurses, who were unaware of the nature of this study.
RESULTS: Desire for information was uniformly high, and did not vary statistically between triage groups (p = 0.41). The most acutely ill patients (level I) were more likely to be excluded by the research interviewer (p < 0.001). Of included level I patients, desire to participate was not decreased (p < 0.01). Higher level of formal education (p = 0.036) and younger age (p < 0.001) were associated with greater desire for autonomy in decision making.
CONCLUSION: Among ED patients able to participate, higher acuity of illness was not associated with a decreased desire for medical information. Many very acutely ill patients preferred autonomy in medical decision making. Older patients and those with less formal education expressed a lesser desire for decision-making autonomy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Professional Patient Relationship

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10463548     DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1999.tb01206.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  10 in total

1.  Using conjoint analysis to model the preferences of different patient segments for attributes of patient-centered care.

Authors:  Charles E Cunningham; Ken Deal; Heather Rimas; Heather Campbell; Ann Russell; Jennifer Henderson; Anne Matheson; Blake Melnick
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Shared Decisionmaking in the Emergency Department: A Guiding Framework for Clinicians.

Authors:  Marc A Probst; Hemal K Kanzaria; Elizabeth M Schoenfeld; Michael D Menchine; Maggie Breslin; Cheryl Walsh; Edward R Melnick; Erik P Hess
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2017-05-27       Impact factor: 5.721

Review 3.  The collaborative autonomy model of medical decision-making.

Authors:  Michael A Rubin
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 3.210

4.  Patient Preferences Regarding Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Findings From a Multisite Survey.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Schoenfeld; Hemal K Kanzaria; Denise D Quigley; Peter St Marie; Nikita Nayyar; Sarah H Sabbagh; Kyle L Gress; Marc A Probst
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2018-07-19       Impact factor: 3.451

5.  Emergency department triage: an ethical analysis.

Authors:  Ramesh P Aacharya; Chris Gastmans; Yvonne Denier
Journal:  BMC Emerg Med       Date:  2011-10-07

6.  Information needs of patients with cancer: results from a large study in UK cancer centres.

Authors:  V Jenkins; L Fallowfield; J Saul
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2001-01-05       Impact factor: 7.640

7.  The Role of Patient Activation in Preferences for Shared Decision Making: Results From a National Survey of U.S. Adults.

Authors:  Samuel G Smith; Anjali Pandit; Steven R Rush; Michael S Wolf; Carol J Simon
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2015-08-27

Review 8.  Addressing overuse in emergency medicine: evidence of a role for greater patient engagement.

Authors:  Erika H Newton
Journal:  Clin Exp Emerg Med       Date:  2017-12-30

9.  Predicting the preferences for involvement in medical decision making among patients with mental disorders.

Authors:  Svea Michaelis; Levente Kriston; Martin Härter; Birgit Watzke; Holger Schulz; Hanne Melchior
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Validity of the French version of the Autonomy Preference Index and its adaptation for patients with advanced cancer.

Authors:  Isabelle Colombet; Laurent Rigal; Miren Urtizberea; Pascale Vinant; Alexandra Rouquette
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.