Literature DB >> 17132353

Involve the patient and pass the MRCGP: investigating shared decision making in a consulting skills examination using a validated instrument.

A Niroshan Siriwardena1, Adrian Gk Edwards, Peter Campion, Adrian Freeman, Glyn Elwyn.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making is an important aspect of patient centredness. Lack of this consulting behaviour is a common reason for failure in the Membership of the Royal College of General Practitioners (MRCGP) consulting skills examination. AIM: To investigate candidates' performance in shared decision making and overall performance in the MRCGP consulting skills assessment compared with an independently validated measure, the OPTION ('observing patient involvement') scale.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: MRCGP examination, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and fifty-two consultations submitted by 36 GPs submitting seven consultations per videotape.
METHOD: A stratified sample of 63 candidates, 21 each from fail, pass and merit selected from candidates in the MRCGP consulting skills examination, were approached for participation. Participants' examination videotapes were independently assessed for shared decision making using the OPTION scale by two non-clinical raters.
RESULTS: Thirty-six candidates (of 63; 57%) who participated were no different from non-participants. Candidates who passed the 'sharing management options' in the MRCGP had significantly higher OPTION scores than those who did not (35.4 versus 27.3; mean difference = 8.1, P = 0.044). There was a significant difference between OPTION scores of MRCGP candidates with 'fail' and 'pass' (including pass with merit): 28.6 versus 36.1, 95% confidence interval CI = 1.13 to 13.87. Scores decreased as clinician age increased but were not significantly associated with sex of GP, age or sex of patient or consultation duration. The probability of passing the MRGCP increased as OPTION scores increased.
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated concurrent validity of the MRCGP consulting skills assessment of sharing management options against an independent validated instrument for shared decision making, the OPTION scale. Candidates who performed best in the MRCGP exhibited high scores with OPTION. This study provides the basis for further work to demonstrate evidence for the potential of training for professional assessment to improve consulting competence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17132353      PMCID: PMC1927094     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  28 in total

1.  Patient centredness in the MRCGP video examination: analysis of large cohort. Membership of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

Authors:  Peter Campion; John Foulkes; Roger Neighbour; Peter Tate
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-09-28

Review 2.  Shared decision making: developing the OPTION scale for measuring patient involvement.

Authors:  G Elwyn; A Edwards; M Wensing; K Hood; C Atwell; R Grol
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2003-04

3.  What do patients want from high-quality general practice and how do we involve them in improvement?

Authors:  Angela Coulter; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Consumers' views of quality in the consultation and their relevance to 'shared decision-making' approaches.

Authors:  A Edwards; G Elwyn; C Smith; S Williams; H Thornton
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Shared decision making and the concept of equipoise: the competences of involving patients in healthcare choices.

Authors:  G Elwyn; A Edwards; P Kinnersley; R Grol
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 5.386

6.  The impact of general practitioners' patient-centredness on patients' post-consultation satisfaction and enablement.

Authors:  Nicola Mead; Peter Bower; Mark Hann
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  Women's views of optimal risk communication and decision making in general practice consultations about the menopause and hormone replacement therapy.

Authors:  Fiona M Walter; Jon D Emery; Margaret Rogers; Nicky Britten
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2004-05

8.  Do patients and expert doctors agree on the assessment of consultation skills? A comparison of two patient consultation assessment scales with the video component of the MRCGP.

Authors:  Brian McKinstry; Jeremy Walker; David Blaney; David Heaney; David Begg
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.267

Review 9.  Patient-centredness in chronic illness: what is it and does it matter?

Authors:  Susan Michie; Jane Miles; John Weinman
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2003-11

10.  Gender differences in health information needs and decisional preferences in patients recovering from an acute ischemic coronary event.

Authors:  Donna E Stewart; Susan E Abbey; Zachary M Shnek; Jane Irvine; Sherry L Grace
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.312

View more
  10 in total

1.  Comparing performance among male and female candidates in sex-specific clinical knowledge in the MRCGP.

Authors:  A Niroshan Siriwardena; Bill Irish; Zahid B Asghar; Hilton Dixon; Paul Milne; Catherine Neden; Jo Richardson; Carol Blow
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 2.  Patients' perceptions of sharing in decisions: a systematic review of interventions to enhance shared decision making in routine clinical practice.

Authors:  France Légaré; Stéphane Turcotte; Dawn Stacey; Stéphane Ratté; Jennifer Kryworuchko; Ian D Graham
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Can shared decision making increase the uptake of evidence in clinical practice?

Authors:  France Légaré; Michèle Shemilt; Dawn Stacey
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-04-21

4.  Brief training of student clinicians in shared decision making: a single-blind randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Tammy C Hoffmann; Sally Bennett; Clare Tomsett; Chris Del Mar
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2014-01-31       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Assessing patients' involvement in decision making during the nutritional consultation with a dietitian.

Authors:  Hugues Vaillancourt; France Légaré; Annie Lapointe; Sarah-Maude Deschênes; Sophie Desroches
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-04-19       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Reliability and validity of the German version of the OPTION scale.

Authors:  Oliver Hirsch; Heidemarie Keller; Meike Müller-Engelmann; Monika Heinzel Gutenbrunner; Tanja Krones; Norbert Donner-Banzhoff
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-04-27       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 7.  Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making: a systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument.

Authors:  Nicolas Couët; Sophie Desroches; Hubert Robitaille; Hugues Vaillancourt; Annie Leblanc; Stéphane Turcotte; Glyn Elwyn; France Légaré
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-03-04       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 8.  Shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions.

Authors:  Edward Duncan; Catherine Best; Suzanne Hagen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-01-20

9.  Clinical decision-making: physicians' preferences and experiences.

Authors:  Elizabeth Murray; Lance Pollack; Martha White; Bernard Lo
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2007-03-15       Impact factor: 2.497

10.  Deficiency areas in decision making in undergraduate medical students.

Authors:  Zalika Klemenc-Ketis; Janko Kersnik
Journal:  Adv Med Educ Pract       Date:  2014-07-16
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.