Literature DB >> 12610196

Shared treatment decision making: what does it mean to physicians?

Cathy A Charles1, Tim Whelan, Amiram Gafni, Andy Willan, Sylvia Farrell.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Physicians are urged to practice shared treatment decision making (STDM), yet this concept is poorly understood. We developed a conceptual framework describing essential characteristics of a shared approach. This study assessed the degree of congruence in the meanings of STDM as described in the framework and as perceived by practicing physicians.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey questionnaire was mailed to eligible Ontario medical and radiation oncologists and surgeons treating women with early-stage breast cancer. Open-ended and structured questions elicited physicians' perceptions of shared decision making.
RESULTS: Most study physicians spontaneously described STDM using characteristics identified in the framework as essential to this concept. When presented with clinical examples in which the decision-making roles of physicians and patients were systematically varied, study physicians overwhelmingly identified example 4 as illustrating a shared approach. This example was deliberately constructed to depict STDM as defined in the framework. In addition, more than 85.0% of physicians identified as important to STDM specific patient and physician roles derived from the framework. These included the following: the physician gives information to the patient on treatment benefits and risks; the patient gives information to the physician about her values; the patient and physician discuss treatment options; both agree on the treatment to implement.
CONCLUSION: Substantial congruence was found between the meaning of STDM as described in the framework and as perceived by study physicians. This supports use of the framework as a conceptual tool to guide research, compare different treatment decision-making approaches, clarify the meaning of STDM, and enhance its translation into practice.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Professional Patient Relationship

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12610196     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.05.057

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  40 in total

1.  The role of perceived benefits and costs in patients' medical decisions.

Authors:  Eleanor Singer; Mick P Couper; Angela Fagerlin; Floyd J Fowler; Carrie A Levin; Peter A Ubel; John Van Hoewyk; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-11-10       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Primary Care Physicians' Support of Shared Decision Making for Different Cancer Screening Decisions.

Authors:  Jennifer Elston Lafata; Richard F Brown; Michael P Pignone; Scott Ratliff; L Aubree Shay
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2016-07-18       Impact factor: 2.583

3.  Do people want to be autonomous patients? Preferred roles in treatment decision-making in several patient populations.

Authors:  Raisa B Deber; Nancy Kraetschmer; Sara Urowitz; Natasha Sharpe
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  New elements for informed decision making: a qualitative study of older adults' views.

Authors:  Erika Leemann Price; Sylvia Bereknyei; Alma Kuby; Wendy Levinson; Clarence Henry Braddock
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2011-07-14

5.  A shared treatment decision-making approach between patients with chronic conditions and their clinicians: the case of diabetes.

Authors:  Victor M Montori; Amiram Gafni; Cathy Charles
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  From informed consent to informed request: do we need a new gold standard?

Authors:  Ben Moulton; Peter Alf Collins; Nick Burns-Cox; Angela Coulter
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  [Opinions of family doctors on the involvement of patients in the taking of decisions: a study with focus groups].

Authors:  Laura Jiménez-De Gracia; Roger Ruiz-Moral; Enrique Gavilán-Moral; Cesar Hueso-Montoro; Dolores Cano-Caballero Gálvez; M Antonia Alba-Dios
Journal:  Aten Primaria       Date:  2011-10-21       Impact factor: 1.137

8.  Patients' decision making to accept or decline an implantable cardioverter defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death.

Authors:  Sandra L Carroll; Patricia H Strachan; Sonya de Laat; Lisa Schwartz; Heather M Arthur
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-06-07       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  A design process for using normative models in shared decision making: a case study in the context of prenatal testing.

Authors:  Sivan Rapaport; Moshe Leshno; Lior Fink
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-10-04       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.