Stephanie Berger1, Elmar Braehler, Jochen Ernst. 1. Independent Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. berger.stephanie@rocketmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore differences between conventional medicine (COM) and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) regarding the attitude toward and the perceived use of shared decision-making (SDM) from the health professional perspective. METHODS: Thirty guideline-based interviews with German GPs and nonmedical practitioners were conducted using qualitative analysis for interpretation. RESULTS: The health professional-patient-relationship in CAM differs from that in COM, as SDM is perceived more often. Reasons for this include external context variables (e.g., longer consultation time) and internal provider beliefs (e.g., attitude toward SDM). German health care policy was regarded as one of the most critical factors which affected the relationship between GPs and their patients and their practice of SDM. CONCLUSION: Differences between COM and CAM regarding the attitude toward and the perceived use of SDM are attributable to diverse concepts of medicine, practice context variables and internal provider factors. Therefore, the perceived feasibility of SDM depends on the complexity of different occupational socialization processes and thus, different value systems between COM and CAM. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Implementation barriers such as insufficient communication skills, lacking SDM training or obedient patients should be reduced. Especially in COM, contextual variables such as political restrictions need to be eliminated to successfully implement SDM.
OBJECTIVE: To explore differences between conventional medicine (COM) and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) regarding the attitude toward and the perceived use of shared decision-making (SDM) from the health professional perspective. METHODS: Thirty guideline-based interviews with German GPs and nonmedical practitioners were conducted using qualitative analysis for interpretation. RESULTS: The health professional-patient-relationship in CAM differs from that in COM, as SDM is perceived more often. Reasons for this include external context variables (e.g., longer consultation time) and internal provider beliefs (e.g., attitude toward SDM). German health care policy was regarded as one of the most critical factors which affected the relationship between GPs and their patients and their practice of SDM. CONCLUSION: Differences between COM and CAM regarding the attitude toward and the perceived use of SDM are attributable to diverse concepts of medicine, practice context variables and internal provider factors. Therefore, the perceived feasibility of SDM depends on the complexity of different occupational socialization processes and thus, different value systems between COM and CAM. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Implementation barriers such as insufficient communication skills, lacking SDM training or obedient patients should be reduced. Especially in COM, contextual variables such as political restrictions need to be eliminated to successfully implement SDM.
Authors: Michael H Bernstein; Cosima Locher; Sif Stewart-Ferrer; Sarah Buergler; Catherine M DesRoches; Michelle L Dossett; Franklin G Miller; Deborah Grose; Charlotte R Blease Journal: Br J Health Psychol Date: 2020-05-30
Authors: Erica B Oberg; Ryan Bradley; Clarissa Hsu; Karen J Sherman; Sheryl Catz; Carlo Calabrese; Daniel C Cherkin Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-11-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Lysbeth Floden; Amy Howerter; Eva Matthews; Mark Nichter; James K Cunningham; Cheryl Ritenbaugh; Judith S Gordon; Myra L Muramoto Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med Date: 2015-05-02 Impact factor: 3.659
Authors: Marion Pérard; Nadine Mittring; David Schweiger; Christopher Kummer; Claudia M Witt Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med Date: 2015-06-09 Impact factor: 3.659