Literature DB >> 27607314

What do stakeholders need to implement shared decision making in routine cancer care? A qualitative needs assessment.

Evamaria Müller1, Pola Hahlweg1, Isabelle Scholl1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is particularly relevant in oncology, where complex treatment options with varying side effects may lead to meaningful changes in the patient's quality of life. For several years, health policies have called for the implementation of SDM, but SDM remains poorly implemented in routine clinical practice. Implementation science has highlighted the importance of assessing stakeholders' needs to inform the development of implementation programs. Thus, the aim of the present study was to assess different stakeholders' needs regarding the implementation of SDM in routine care.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A qualitative study using focus groups and interviews was conducted. Focus groups were carried out with junior physicians, senior physicians, nurses and other healthcare providers (HPCs) (e.g. psycho-oncologists, physiotherapists), patients and family members. Head physicians as well as other HPCs in management positions were interviewed. Audiotapes of focus groups and interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using content analysis.
RESULTS: Six focus groups with a total of n = 42 stakeholders as well as n = 17 interviews were conducted. Focus groups and interviews revealed five main categories of needs to be fulfilled in order to achieve a better implementation of SDM in routine cancer care: 1) changes in communication, 2) involvement of other parties, 3) a trustful patient-physician relationship, 4) culture change and 5) structural changes. Stakeholders discussed four clusters of intervention strategies that could foster the implementation of SDM in routine cancer care: 1) clinician-mediated interventions, 2) patient-mediated interventions, 3) provision of patient information material and 4) the establishment of a patient advocate.
CONCLUSION: Study results show that stakeholders voiced a diversity of needs to foster implementation of SDM in routine cancer care, of which some can be directly addressed by intervention strategies. Present results can be used to develop an implementation program to foster SDM in routine cancer care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27607314     DOI: 10.1080/0284186X.2016.1227087

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Oncol        ISSN: 0284-186X            Impact factor:   4.089


  12 in total

1.  Patient participation in treatment decision-making of prostate cancer: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Shucheng Pan; Jinjiao Mao; Lijuan Wang; Yun Dai; Wei Wang
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  The involvement of early stage breast cancer patients during oncology consultations in Italy: a multi-centred, randomized controlled trial of a question prompt sheet versus question listing.

Authors:  Alessandro Bottacini; Claudia Goss; Maria Angela Mazzi; Alberto Ghilardi; Chiara Buizza; Annamaria Molino; Elena Fiorio; Rolando Nortilli; Vito Amoroso; Lucia Vassalli; Richard F Brown
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 3.  Organizational- and system-level characteristics that influence implementation of shared decision-making and strategies to address them - a scoping review.

Authors:  Isabelle Scholl; Allison LaRussa; Pola Hahlweg; Sarah Kobrin; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 7.327

4.  Quality of teamwork in multidisciplinary cancer team meetings: A feasibility study.

Authors:  David Benjamin Lumenta; Gerald Sendlhofer; Gudrun Pregartner; Marlies Hart; Peter Tiefenbacher; Lars Peter Kamolz; Gernot Brunner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-02-15       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Shared clinical decision-making experiences in nursing: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Fen-Fang Chung; Pao-Yu Wang; Shu-Chuan Lin; Yu-Hsia Lee; Hon-Yen Wu; Mei-Hsiang Lin
Journal:  BMC Nurs       Date:  2021-06-01

6.  Shared decision making in cancer treatment: A Dutch national survey on patients' preferences and perceptions.

Authors:  Marieke M T Kuijpers; Haske van Veenendaal; Vivian Engelen; Ella Visserman; Eveline A Noteboom; Anne M Stiggelbout; Anne M May; Niek de Wit; Elsken van der Wall; Charles W Helsper
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Care (Engl)       Date:  2021-11-02       Impact factor: 2.328

7.  Evaluation of a program for routine implementation of shared decision-making in cancer care: study protocol of a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial.

Authors:  Isabelle Scholl; Pola Hahlweg; Anja Lindig; Carsten Bokemeyer; Anja Coym; Henning Hanken; Volkmar Müller; Ralf Smeets; Isabell Witzel; Levente Kriston; Martin Härter
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 7.327

8.  How are decisions made in cancer care? A qualitative study using participant observation of current practice.

Authors:  Pola Hahlweg; Martin Härter; Yvonne Nestoriuc; Isabelle Scholl
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-09-27       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Understanding decision making about major surgery: protocol for a qualitative study of shared decision making by high-risk patients and their clinical teams.

Authors:  Sara Shaw; Gemma Hughes; Tim Stephens; Rupert Pearse; John Prowle; Richard Edmund Ashcroft; Ester Avagliano; James Day; Mark Edsell; Jennifer Edwards; Leslie Everest
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 10.  Applying the Behavioural and Social Sciences Research (BSSR) Functional Framework to HIV Cure Research.

Authors:  Karine Dubé; Judith D Auerbach; Michael J Stirratt; Paul Gaist
Journal:  J Int AIDS Soc       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 5.396

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.