Literature DB >> 20180157

Decision-making role preferences among patients with HIV: associations with patient and provider characteristics and communication behaviors.

Rashmi Kumar1, P Todd Korthuis, Somnath Saha, Geetanjali Chander, Victoria Sharp, Jonathon Cohn, Richard Moore, Mary Catherine Beach.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A preference for shared decision-making among patients with HIV has been associated with better health outcomes. One possible explanation for this association is that patients who prefer a more active role in decision-making are more engaged in the communication process during encounters with their providers. Little is known, however, about patient and provider characteristics or communication behaviors associated with patient decision-making preferences in HIV settings.
OBJECTIVE: We examined patient and provider characteristics and patient-provider communication behaviors associated with the decision-making role preferences of patients with HIV.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of patient and provider questionnaires and audio recorded clinical encounters from four sites. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 45 providers and 434 of their patients with HIV. MEASURES: Patients were asked how they prefer to be involved in the decision-making process (doctor makes all/most decisions, patients and doctors share decisions, or patients make decisions alone). Measures of provider and patient communication behaviors were coded from audio recordings using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. MAIN
RESULTS: Overall, 72% of patients preferred to share decisions with their provider, 23% wanted their provider to make decisions, and 5% wanted to make decisions themselves. Compared to patients who preferred to share decisions with their provider, patients who preferred their provider make decisions were less likely to be above the age of 60 (ARR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01-0.89) and perceive high quality provider communication about decision-making (ARR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23-0.73), and more likely to have depressive symptoms (ARR 1.92, 95% CI 1.07-3.44). There was no significant association between patient preferences and measures of provider or patient communication behavior.
CONCLUSION: Observed measures of patient and provider communication behavior were similar across all patient decision-making role preferences, indicating that it may be difficult for providers to determine these preferences based solely on communication behavior. Engaging patients in open discussion about decision-making preferences may be a more effective approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20180157      PMCID: PMC2869417          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-010-1275-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  38 in total

Review 1.  What do we mean by partnership in making decisions about treatment?

Authors:  C Charles; T Whelan; A Gafni
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-09-18

2.  Race, gender, and partnership in the patient-physician relationship.

Authors:  L Cooper-Patrick; J J Gallo; J J Gonzales; H T Vu; N R Powe; C Nelson; D E Ford
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-08-11       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango).

Authors:  C Charles; A Gafni; T Whelan
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  Physician-patient communication. The relationship with malpractice claims among primary care physicians and surgeons.

Authors:  W Levinson; D L Roter; J P Mullooly; V T Dull; R M Frankel
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-02-19       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  "Making all the difference in the world": how physicians can help HIV-seropositive patients become more involved in their healthcare.

Authors:  B Gerbert; C Love; N Caspers; K Linkins; J H Burack
Journal:  AIDS Patient Care STDS       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 5.078

6.  What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making?

Authors:  R B Deber; N Kraetschmer; J Irvine
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1996-07-08

7.  Screening for depression in well older adults: evaluation of a short form of the CES-D (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale).

Authors:  E M Andresen; J A Malmgren; W B Carter; D L Patrick
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  1994 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.043

8.  Patient-provider communication during the emergency department care of children with asthma. The National Cooperative Inner-City Asthma Study, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, NIH, Bethesda, MD.

Authors:  L S Wissow; D Roter; L J Bauman; E Crain; C Kercsmar; K Weiss; H Mitchell; B Mohr
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Patient desire for information and decision making in health care decisions: the Autonomy Preference Index and the Health Opinion Survey.

Authors:  R F Nease; W B Brooks
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Whose health is it? Views about decision-making and information-seeking from people with HIV infection and their professional carers.

Authors:  J Catalan; N Brener; H Andrews; A Day; S Cullum; M Hooker; B Gazzard
Journal:  AIDS Care       Date:  1994
View more
  14 in total

1.  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

2.  Trust in government and support for governmental regulation: the case of electronic health records.

Authors:  Mitchel N Herian; Nancy C Shank; Tarik L Abdel-Monem
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Client preferences affect treatment satisfaction, completion, and clinical outcome: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Oliver Lindhiem; Charles B Bennett; Christopher J Trentacosta; Caitlin McLear
Journal:  Clin Psychol Rev       Date:  2014-06-16

4.  Decision role preferences for return of results from genome sequencing amongst young breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Cindy B Matsen; Sarah Lyons; Melody S Goodman; Barbara B Biesecker; Kimberly A Kaphingst
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2018-08-04

5.  How does decision complexity affect shared decision making? An analysis of patient-provider antiretroviral initiation dialogue.

Authors:  Wynne Callon; Somnath Saha; Ira B Wilson; Michael Barton Laws; Michele Massa; P Todd Korthuis; Victoria Sharp; Jonathan Cohn; Richard D Moore; Mary Catherine Beach
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2016-12-16

6.  Internet health information seeking behavior and antiretroviral adherence in persons living with HIV/AIDS.

Authors:  Lipika Samal; Somnath Saha; Geetanjali Chander; P Todd Korthuis; Rashmi K Sharma; Victoria Sharp; Jonathan Cohn; Richard D Moore; Mary Catherine Beach
Journal:  AIDS Patient Care STDS       Date:  2011-06-17       Impact factor: 5.078

7.  Patient reported interpersonal processes of care and perceived social position: the Diabetes Study of Northern California (DISTANCE).

Authors:  David Moskowitz; Courtney Rees Lyles; Andrew J Karter; Nancy Adler; Howard H Moffet; Dean Schillinger
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2011-08-19

8.  A mixed methods study of patient-provider communication about opioid analgesics.

Authors:  Helen Kinsman Hughes; Philip Todd Korthuis; Somnath Saha; Susan Eggly; Victoria Sharp; Jonathan Cohn; Richard Moore; Mary Catherine Beach
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2015-01-03

9.  Problems and processes in medical encounters: the cases method of dialogue analysis.

Authors:  M Barton Laws; Tatiana Taubin; Tanya Bezreh; Yoojin Lee; Mary Catherine Beach; Ira B Wilson
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2013-02-04

10.  Patient preference and satisfaction with their involvement in the selection of an anesthetic method for surgery.

Authors:  Sung Mi Hwang; Jae Jun Lee; Ji Su Jang; Gi Ho Gim; Min Chul Kim; So Young Lim
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 2.153

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.