Literature DB >> 18722074

Audit and feedback using the brief Decision Support Analysis Tool (DSAT-10) to evaluate nurse-standardized patient encounters.

Dawn Stacey1, Monica Taljaard, Elizabeth R Drake, Annette M O'Connor.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the brief Decision Support Analysis Tool (DSAT-10) for auditing the quality of nurse-standardized patient encounters, structuring feedback for nurses, and testing instrument reliability.
METHODS: A systematic process was used to develop standardized patient scenarios, pilot-test scenarios, calibrate DSAT-10 coders, analyze taped telephone encounters using DSAT-10, and provide feedback. Inter-rater reliability was calculated using coder agreement, kappa, and intra-class correlation coefficients.
RESULTS: Six scenarios portrayed patients' decisional uncertainty from either: pressure from others (n=2), unclear values (n=2), or inadequate information (n=2). Scenarios were easy to use over the telephone, produced realistic role performance, and were practical for audio-recording interactions. DSAT-10 analysis of 76 nurse-standardized patient encounters revealed nurses' strengths (e.g., information provision) and their limitations (e.g., lack of discussion of values and/or support needs). Scores discriminated between trained and untrained nurses. The kappa coefficient over all items was 0.55 (95% CI: 0.49, 0.61) with higher agreement for encounters involving trained nurses (0.62; 95% CI: 0.43, 0.80).
CONCLUSION: Auditing nurse-standardized patient encounters using DSAT-10 and providing feedback to nurses was feasible. Although DSAT-10 items had adequate inter-rater reliability and discriminated between trained/untrained nurses, some items were problematic. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Providing feedback on nurse encounters with standardized patients experiencing uncertainty has the potential to enhance nurses' decision support skills.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18722074     DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  12 in total

Review 1.  Development of a Draft Core Set of Domains for Measuring Shared Decision Making in Osteoarthritis: An OMERACT Working Group on Shared Decision Making.

Authors:  Karine Toupin-April; Jennifer Barton; Liana Fraenkel; Linda Li; Viviane Grandpierre; Francis Guillemin; Tamara Rader; Dawn Stacey; France Légaré; Janet Jull; Jennifer Petkovic; Marieke Scholte-Voshaar; Vivian Welch; Anne Lyddiatt; Cathie Hofstetter; Maarten De Wit; Lyn March; Tanya Meade; Robin Christensen; Cécile Gaujoux-Viala; Maria E Suarez-Almazor; Annelies Boonen; Christoph Pohl; Richard Martin; Peter S Tugwell
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2015-04-15       Impact factor: 4.666

2.  Feasibility of training oncology residents in shared decision making: a pilot study.

Authors:  Dawn Stacey; Rajiv Samant; Mistrel Pratt; France Légaré
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 3.  The quality of instruments to assess the process of shared decision making: A systematic review.

Authors:  Fania R Gärtner; Hanna Bomhof-Roordink; Ian P Smith; Isabelle Scholl; Anne M Stiggelbout; Arwen H Pieterse
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Developing a web-based oncofertility tool for reproductive-age women with breast cancer based on social support framework.

Authors:  Sheng-Miauh Huang; Ling-Ming Tseng; Ming-Jeng Yang; Aria Chang; Pei-Ju Lien; Yvonne Hsiung
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2022-04-19       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Shared decision making process measures and patient problems.

Authors:  Sandra A Hartasanchez; Stuart W Grande; Victor M Montori; Marleen Kunneman; Juan P Brito; Sarah McCarthy; Ian G Hargraves
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2021-11-08

6.  MAPPIN'SDM--the multifocal approach to sharing in shared decision making.

Authors:  Jürgen Kasper; Frauke Hoffmann; Christoph Heesen; Sascha Köpke; Friedemann Geiger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-04-13       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Interventions for increasing the use of shared decision making by healthcare professionals.

Authors:  France Légaré; Rhéda Adekpedjou; Dawn Stacey; Stéphane Turcotte; Jennifer Kryworuchko; Ian D Graham; Anne Lyddiatt; Mary C Politi; Richard Thomson; Glyn Elwyn; Norbert Donner-Banzhoff
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-07-19

8.  Implementation of a cystic fibrosis lung transplant referral patient decision aid in routine clinical practice: an observational study.

Authors:  Dawn Stacey; Katherine L Vandemheen; Rosamund Hennessey; Tracy Gooyers; Ena Gaudet; Ranjeeta Mallick; Josette Salgado; Andreas Freitag; Yves Berthiaume; Neil Brown; Shawn D Aaron
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2015-02-07       Impact factor: 7.327

9.  Do Shared Decision-Making Measures Reflect Key Elements of Shared Decision Making? A Content Review of Coding Schemes.

Authors:  Marleen Kunneman; Inge Henselmans; Fania R Gärtner; Hanna Bomhof-Roordink; Arwen H Pieterse
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2019-09-26       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  Translation, transcultural adaptation, and validation of two questionnaires on shared decision making.

Authors:  María Victoria Ruiz Yanzi; Mariela Silvia Barani; Juan Victor Ariel Franco; Fernando Ramón Vazquez Peña; Sergio Adrian Terrasa; Karin Silvana Kopitowski
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.