Carlos De las Cuevas1, Wenceslao Peñate2, Luis de Rivera3. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Dermatology and Psychiatry, University of La Laguna, San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Spain. Electronic address: cdelascuevas@gmail.com. 2. Department of Personality, Assessment and Psychological Treatments, University of La Laguna, San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Spain. 3. Department of Psychiatry, University Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the concordance between patients' preferred role in clinical decision-making and the role they usually experience in their psychiatric consultations and to analyze the influence of socio-demographic, clinical and personality characteristics on patients' preferences. METHODS: 677 consecutive psychiatric outpatients were invited to participate in a cross-sectional survey and 507 accepted. Patients completed Control Preference Scale twice consecutively before consultation, one for their preferences of participation and another for the style they usually experienced until then, and locus of control and self-efficacy scales. RESULTS: Sixty-three percent of psychiatric outpatients preferred a collaborative role in decision-making, 35% preferred a passive role and only a 2% an active one. A low concordance for preferred and experienced participation in medical decision-making was registered, with more than a half of patients wanting a more active role than they actually had. Age and doctors' health locus of control orientation were found to be the best correlates for participation preferences, while age and gender were for experienced. Psychiatric diagnoses registered significant differences in patients' preferences of participation but no concerning experiences. CONCLUSION: The limited concordance between preferred and experienced roles in psychiatric patients is indicative that clinicians need to raise their sensitivity regarding patient's participation. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The assessment of patient's attribution style should be useful for psychiatrist to set objectives and priority in the communication with their patients.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the concordance between patients' preferred role in clinical decision-making and the role they usually experience in their psychiatric consultations and to analyze the influence of socio-demographic, clinical and personality characteristics on patients' preferences. METHODS: 677 consecutive psychiatric outpatients were invited to participate in a cross-sectional survey and 507 accepted. Patients completed Control Preference Scale twice consecutively before consultation, one for their preferences of participation and another for the style they usually experienced until then, and locus of control and self-efficacy scales. RESULTS: Sixty-three percent of psychiatric outpatients preferred a collaborative role in decision-making, 35% preferred a passive role and only a 2% an active one. A low concordance for preferred and experienced participation in medical decision-making was registered, with more than a half of patients wanting a more active role than they actually had. Age and doctors' health locus of control orientation were found to be the best correlates for participation preferences, while age and gender were for experienced. Psychiatric diagnoses registered significant differences in patients' preferences of participation but no concerning experiences. CONCLUSION: The limited concordance between preferred and experienced roles in psychiatricpatients is indicative that clinicians need to raise their sensitivity regarding patient's participation. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The assessment of patient's attribution style should be useful for psychiatrist to set objectives and priority in the communication with their patients.
Authors: Inés Morán-Sánchez; María A Bernal-López; Maria D Pérez-Cárceles Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2019-11-14 Impact factor: 4.328
Authors: Sascha M Keij; Joyce E de Boer; Anne M Stiggelbout; Wändi Bruine de Bruin; Ellen Peters; Saïda Moaddine; Marleen Kunneman; Arwen H Pieterse Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-05-24 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Lilisbeth Perestelo-Perez; Amado Rivero-Santana; Juan Antonio Sanchez-Afonso; Jeanette Perez-Ramos; Carmen Luisa Castellano-Fuentes; Karen Sepucha; Pedro Serrano-Aguilar Journal: Health Expect Date: 2017-03-10 Impact factor: 3.377