Literature DB >> 19846245

Exploring patient involvement in healthcare decision making across different education and functional health literacy groups.

Sian K Smith1, Ann Dixon, Lyndal Trevena, Don Nutbeam, Kirsten J McCaffery.   

Abstract

Education and health literacy potentially limit a person's ability to be involved in decisions about their health. Few studies, however, have explored understandings and experiences of involvement in decision making among patients varying in education and health literacy. This paper reports on a qualitative interview study of 73 men and women living in Sydney, Australia, with varying education and functional health literacy levels. Participants were recruited from a community sample with lower educational attainment, plus an educated sample of University of Sydney alumni. The transcripts were analysed using the 'Framework' approach, a matrix-based method of thematic analysis. We found that participants with different education conceptualised their involvement in decision making in diverse ways. Participants with higher education appeared to conceive their involvement as sharing the responsibility with the doctor throughout the decision-making process. This entailed verifying the credibility of the information and exploring options beyond those presented in the consultation. They also viewed themselves as helping others in their health decisions and acting as information resources. In contrast, participants with lower education appeared to conceive their involvement in terms of consenting to an option recommended by the doctor, and having responsibility for the ultimate decision, to agree or disagree with the recommendation. They also described how relatives and friends sought information on their behalf and played a key role in their decisions. Both education groups described how aspects of the patient-practitioner relationship (e.g. continuity, negotiation, trust) and the practitioner's interpersonal communication skills influenced their involvement. Health information served a variety of needs for all groups (e.g. supporting psychosocial, practical and decision support needs). These findings have practical implications for how to involve patients with different education and literacy levels in decision making, and highlight the important role of the patient-practitioner relationship in the process of decision making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19846245     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.09.056

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


  103 in total

1.  Low education as a risk factor for undiagnosed angina.

Authors:  Michael M McKee; Paul C Winters; Kevin Fiscella
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med       Date:  2012 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.657

2.  Effectiveness of antenatal screening for sickle cell trait: the impact on women's self-report of sickle cell trait status.

Authors:  J M Knight-Madden; M Reid; N Younger; D Francis; S McFarlane; R Wilks
Journal:  Pathog Glob Health       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  A Look at Person- and Family-Centered Care Among Older Adults: Results from a National Survey [corrected].

Authors:  Jennifer L Wolff; Cynthia M Boyd
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2015-05-02       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Shared Decision-Making During Inpatient Rounds: Opportunities for Improvement in Patient Engagement and Communication.

Authors:  Rebecca Blankenburg; Joan F Hilton; Patrick Yuan; Stephanie Rennke; Brad Monash; Stephanie M Harman; Debbie S Sakai; Poonam Hosamani; Adeena Khan; Ian Chua; Eric Huynh; Lisa Shieh; Lijia Xie
Journal:  J Hosp Med       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 2.960

5.  Effect of Health Literacy on Decision-Making Preferences among Medically Underserved Patients.

Authors:  Joann Seo; Melody S Goodman; Mary Politi; Melvin Blanchard; Kimberly A Kaphingst
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  Prescription medicines: decision-making preferences of patients who receive different levels of public subsidy.

Authors:  Jane Robertson; Evan Doran; David A Henry; Glenn Salkeld
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-08-12       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Patient engagement and shared decision-making: What do they look like in neurology practice?

Authors:  Melissa J Armstrong; Lisa M Shulman; Joseph Vandigo; C Daniel Mullins
Journal:  Neurol Clin Pract       Date:  2016-04

8.  Good intentions are not enough: how informatics interventions can worsen inequality.

Authors:  Tiffany C Veinot; Hannah Mitchell; Jessica S Ancker
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 4.497

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.  What is a good medical decision? A research agenda guided by perspectives from multiple stakeholders.

Authors:  Jada G Hamilton; Sarah E Lillie; Dana L Alden; Laura Scherer; Megan Oser; Christine Rini; Miho Tanaka; John Baleix; Mikki Brewster; Simon Craddock Lee; Mary K Goldstein; Robert M Jacobson; Ronald E Myers; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Erika A Waters
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2016-08-26
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.