Literature DB >> 11021866

Do patients wish to be involved in decision making in the consultation? A cross sectional survey with video vignettes.

B McKinstry1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine patients' preferences for a shared or directed style of consultation in the decision making part of the general practice consultation.
DESIGN: Structured interview, with video vignettes of acted consultations.
SETTING: 5 practices in Lothian, Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: 410 patients (adults and adults accompanying children) attending surgery appointments. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preference for shared or directed form of video vignette for five different presenting conditions.
RESULTS: Patients varied in their preference for involvement in decision making in the consultation. Under multiple regression analysis, patients' preference was found to be independently predicted by the problem viewed (patients presented with physical problems preferred a directed approach), patients' age (patients aged 61 or older were more likely to prefer the directed approach), social class (social classes I and II were more likely to prefer the shared approach), and smoking status (smokers more likely to prefer the shared approach). Those patients who were able to answer (or who thought their doctor's style similar to those in the vignettes) were more likely to describe their own doctor's style as similar to their preferred style. No major association in preference was found with sex, frequency of attendance, or perceived chronic ill health.
CONCLUSION: Patients may vary in their desire for involvement in decision making in consultations. Although this variation seems to depend on the presenting problem, age, social class, and smoking status, these associations are not absolute, with large minorities in each group. Doctors need the skills, knowledge of their patients, and the time to determine on which occasions, with which illnesses, and at which level their patients wish to be involved in decision making.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Professional Patient Relationship

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11021866      PMCID: PMC27496          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.321.7265.867

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  18 in total

1.  A contribution to the philosophy of medicine; the basic models of the doctor-patient relationship.

Authors:  T S SZASZ; M H HOLLENDER
Journal:  AMA Arch Intern Med       Date:  1956-05

2.  Patient knowledge and the content of the consultation in general practice.

Authors:  D J Bain
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  1977-09       Impact factor: 6.251

3.  Sounding board. The psychology of responsibility: some second thoughts on holistic medicine.

Authors:  J Shapiro; D H Shapiro
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1979-07-26       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Randomised clinical trial of strategies for improving medication compliance in primary hypertension.

Authors:  D L Sackett; R B Haynes; E S Gibson; B C Hackett; D W Taylor; R S Roberts; A L Johnson
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1975-05-31       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  'Time and motion' in general practice.

Authors:  I C Buchan
Journal:  Practitioner       Date:  1978-09

6.  The patient's role in clinical decision-making.

Authors:  D S Brody
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1980-11       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  The communication of medical information in general practice consultations as a function of patients' social class.

Authors:  D A Pendleton; S Bochner
Journal:  Soc Sci Med Med Psychol Med Sociol       Date:  1980-12

8.  Interaction exchange structure and patient satisfaction with medical interviews.

Authors:  W B Stiles; S M Putnam; M H Wolf; S A James
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1979-06       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Negotiation as an integral part of the physician's clinical reasoning.

Authors:  P B Heaton
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  1981-11       Impact factor: 0.493

10.  Information and participation preferences among cancer patients.

Authors:  B R Cassileth; R V Zupkis; K Sutton-Smith; V March
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1980-06       Impact factor: 25.391

View more
  75 in total

1.  Medical tests: women's reported and preferred decision-making roles and preferences for information on benefits, side-effects and false results.

Authors:  Heather M Davey; Alexandra L Barratt; Elizabeth Davey; Phyllis N Butow; Sally Redman; Nehmat Houssami; Glenn P Salkeld
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 2.  The social gradient in doctor-patient communication.

Authors:  Evelyn Verlinde; Nele De Laender; Stéphanie De Maesschalck; Myriam Deveugele; Sara Willems
Journal:  Int J Equity Health       Date:  2012-03-12

3.  Re-evaluating revalidation and appraisal.

Authors:  Mike Pringle
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Severe acute respiratory syndrome--novel virus, recurring theme.

Authors:  Anthony Harnden; Richard Mayon-White
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Special non-clinical interests--GPs in education, research, and management.

Authors:  Amanda Howe; Maureen Baker; Steve Field; Mike Pringle
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 5.386

6.  Clients or citizens? Some considerations for primary care organisations.

Authors:  Peter G Cawston; Rosaline S Barbour
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 5.386

7.  Patient participation in the discussions of options in Spanish primary care consultations.

Authors:  Roger Ruiz Moral; Lucía Peralta Munguía; Luis Ángel Pérula de Torres; Maria Teresa Carrión; Jorge Olloqui Mundet; Mariana Martínez
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Mutual influence in shared decision making: a collaborative study of patients and physicians.

Authors:  Beth A Lown; William D Clark; Janice L Hanson
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2009-02-22       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  General Practitioners' Empathy and Health Outcomes: A Prospective Observational Study of Consultations in Areas of High and Low Deprivation.

Authors:  Stewart W Mercer; Maria Higgins; Annemieke M Bikker; Bridie Fitzpatrick; Alex McConnachie; Suzanne M Lloyd; Paul Little; Graham C M Watt
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 5.166

10.  Participating in the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS): a qualitative study of patients' experiences.

Authors:  Julia Lawton; Anna Fox; Charles Fox; Ann Louise Kinmonth
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 5.386

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.