Literature DB >> 12570976

What are the ingredients for a successful evidence-based patient choice consultation?: A qualitative study.

Sarah Ford1, Theo Schofield, Tony Hope.   

Abstract

The evidence-based patient choice (EBPC) approach is one of a number of newly emerging templates for medical encounters that advocate evidence-informed choice and shared decision-making. These models emphasise respect for patient preferences for involvement in health care decisions and advocate the sharing of good quality evidence-based information. In the medical consultation EBPC involves providing patients with evidence-based information in a way that facilitates their ability to make choices or decisions about their health care. Whereas the key principles of shared decision-making have been conceptualised, so far, no qualitative investigations have been undertaken to establish the key components of an EBPC consultation. Therefore, a series of semi-structured interviews were carried out with key informants to identify the elements and skills required for a successful EBPC consultation to occur. The interviews were conducted with purposively selected UK general practitioners (n=11), hospital doctors (n=10), practice nurses (n=5), academics (n=11) and lay people (n=8). Qualitative analysis of participants' responses was conducted using the constant comparative method. Six main themes emerged from the data, these were research evidence/medical information, the doctor-patient relationship, patient perspectives, decision-making processes, time issues and establishing the patient's problem. All respondents placed importance on doctors and patients being well informed and appraised of the latest available medical evidence. There was a general view that evidence-based information regarding diagnosis and treatment options should be shared with patients during a consultation. However, there were no suggestions as to how this might be achieved in practice. Participants' opinions relating to which model of decision-making should be adopted ranged from favouring an informed choice model, to the view that decision-making should be shared equally. Similarly, there was no clear view on how much guidance a doctor should offer a patient during decision-making concerning the most appropriate treatment option for that patient.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12570976     DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00056-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  31 in total

1.  Perceptions around concordance--focus groups and semi-structured interviews conducted with consumers, pharmacists and general practitioners.

Authors:  Jasmina Bajramovic; Lynne Emmerton; Susan E Tett
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Factors influencing behavioral intention regarding prostate cancer screening among older African-American men.

Authors:  Marvella E Ford; Sally W Vernon; Suzanne L Havstad; Shirley A Thomas; Shawna D Davis
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 1.798

3.  A problem for achieving informed choice.

Authors:  Adam La Caze
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2008-09-19

4.  Who's afraid of EBM? Medical professionalism from the perspective of evidence-based medicine.

Authors:  Sabine Salloch
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2017-03

5.  Shared decision making in oncology: assessing oncologist behaviour in consultations in which adjuvant therapy is considered after primary surgical treatment.

Authors:  Simron Singh; Phyllis Butow; Margaret Charles; Martin H N Tattersall
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2010-06-23       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Clinician-patient agreement about the work disability problem of patients having persistent pain: why it matters.

Authors:  Marie-France Coutu; Raymond Baril; Marie-José Durand; Daniel Côté; Geneviève Cadieux
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2013-03

7.  The influence of patient expectations regarding cure on treatment decisions.

Authors:  Marci E J Gleason; Felicity W K Harper; Susan Eggly; John C Ruckdeschel; Terrance L Albrecht
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2009-01-14

8.  Patient choice and evidence based decisions: The case of complementary therapies.

Authors:  Lesley Wye; Alison Shaw; Debbie Sharp
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2009-07-28       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Using health communication best practices to develop a web-based provider-patient communication aid: the CONNECT study.

Authors:  Linda Fleisher; Joanne Buzaglo; Michael Collins; Jennifer Millard; Suzanne M Miller; Brian L Egleston; Nicholas Solarino; Jonathan Trinastic; Donald J Cegala; Al B Benson; Kevin A Schulman; Kevin P Weinfurt; Daniel Sulmasy; Michael A Diefenbach; Neal J Meropol
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2008-04-15

10.  Factors prompting PSA-testing of asymptomatic men in a country with no guidelines: a national survey of general practitioners.

Authors:  Frances J Drummond; Anne-Elie Carsin; Linda Sharp; Harry Comber
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2009-01-12       Impact factor: 2.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.