OBJECTIVE: To assess older adults' attitudes toward eliciting health outcome priorities. METHODS: This observational cohort study of 356 community-living adults age ≥65 included three tools: (1) Health Outcomes: ranking four outcomes (survival, function, freedom from pain, and freedom from other symptoms); (2) Now vs. Later: rating importance of current versus future quality of life; (3) Attitude Scale: agreement with statements about health outcomes and current versus future health. RESULTS: Whereas 41% preferred Health Outcomes, 40% preferred the Attitude Scale. Only 7-12% rated any tool as very hard or hard. In bivariate analysis, participants of non-white race and with lower education, health literacy, and functional status were significantly more likely to rate at least one of the tools as easy (p < .05). Across all tools, 17% of participants believed tools would change care. The main reason for thinking there would be no change was satisfaction with existing care (62%). CONCLUSIONS: There is variability in how older persons wish to be asked about health outcome priorities. Few find this task difficult, and difficulty was not greater among participants with lower health literacy, education, or health status. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: By offering different tools, healthcare providers can help patients clarify their health outcome priorities.
OBJECTIVE: To assess older adults' attitudes toward eliciting health outcome priorities. METHODS: This observational cohort study of 356 community-living adults age ≥65 included three tools: (1) Health Outcomes: ranking four outcomes (survival, function, freedom from pain, and freedom from other symptoms); (2) Now vs. Later: rating importance of current versus future quality of life; (3) Attitude Scale: agreement with statements about health outcomes and current versus future health. RESULTS: Whereas 41% preferred Health Outcomes, 40% preferred the Attitude Scale. Only 7-12% rated any tool as very hard or hard. In bivariate analysis, participants of non-white race and with lower education, health literacy, and functional status were significantly more likely to rate at least one of the tools as easy (p < .05). Across all tools, 17% of participants believed tools would change care. The main reason for thinking there would be no change was satisfaction with existing care (62%). CONCLUSIONS: There is variability in how older persons wish to be asked about health outcome priorities. Few find this task difficult, and difficulty was not greater among participants with lower health literacy, education, or health status. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: By offering different tools, healthcare providers can help patients clarify their health outcome priorities.
Authors: Jerry H Gurwitz; Terry S Field; Leslie R Harrold; Jeffrey Rothschild; Kristin Debellis; Andrew C Seger; Cynthia Cadoret; Leslie S Fish; Lawrence Garber; Michael Kelleher; David W Bates Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-03-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Tejal K Gandhi; Saul N Weingart; Joshua Borus; Andrew C Seger; Josh Peterson; Elisabeth Burdick; Diane L Seger; Kirstin Shu; Frank Federico; Lucian L Leape; David W Bates Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-04-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Dominick L Frosch; Suepattra G May; Katharine A S Rendle; Caroline Tietbohl; Glyn Elwyn Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Hilary A Llewellyn-Thomas; J Michael Paterson; Judy A Carter; Antoni Basinsk; Martin G Myers; Gordon D Hardacre; Earl V Dunn; Ralph B D'Agostino; Philip A Wolf; C David Naylor Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2002 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Ana Isabel Gonzalez; Christine Schmucker; Joerg J Meerpohl; Christiane Muth; Julia Nothacker; Edith Motschall; Truc Sophia Nguyen; Maria-Sophie Brueckle; Jeanet Blom; Marjan van den Akker; Kristian Röttger; Odette Wegwarth; Tammy Hoffmann; Sharon E Straus; Ferdinand M Gerlach Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-12-15 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Annette Eidam; Anja Roth; Eduard Frick; Michael Metzner; Anette Lampert; Hanna M Seidling; Walter E Haefeli; Jürgen M Bauer Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2022-07-23 Impact factor: 2.314
Authors: Annette Eidam; Anja Roth; André Lacroix; Sabine Goisser; Hanna M Seidling; Walter E Haefeli; Jürgen M Bauer Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2020-03-04 Impact factor: 2.711