Literature DB >> 27803362

Toward Optimal Decision Making among Vulnerable Patients Referred for Cardiac Surgery: A Qualitative Analysis of Patient and Provider Perspectives.

Ryan A Gainer1, Janet Curran1, Karen J Buth1, Jennie G David1, Jean-Francois Légaré1, Gregory M Hirsch1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Comprehension of risks, benefits, and alternative treatment options has been shown to be poor among patients referred for cardiac interventions. Patients' values and preferences are rarely explicitly sought. An increasing proportion of frail and older patients are undergoing complex cardiac surgical procedures with increased risk of both mortality and prolonged institutional care. We sought input from patients and caregivers to determine the optimal approach to decision making in this vulnerable patient population.
METHODS: Focus groups were held with both providers and former patients. Three focus groups were convened for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG), Valve, or CABG +Valve patients ≥ 70 y old (2-y post-op, ≤ 8-wk post-op, complicated post-op course) (n = 15). Three focus groups were convened for Intermediate Medical Care Unit (IMCU) nurses, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) nurses, surgeons, anesthesiologists and cardiac intensivists (n = 20). We used a semi-structured interview format to ask questions surrounding the informed consent process. Transcribed audio data was analyzed to develop consistent and comprehensive themes.
RESULTS: We identified 5 main themes that influence the decision making process: educational barriers, educational facilitators, patient autonomy and perceived autonomy, patient and family expectations of care, and decision making advocates. All themes were influenced by time constraints experienced in the current consent process. Patient groups expressed a desire to receive information earlier in their care to allow time to identify personal values and preferences in developing plans for treatment. Both groups strongly supported a formal approach for shared decision making with a decisional coach to provide information and facilitate communication with the care team.
CONCLUSIONS: Identifying the barriers and facilitators to patient and caretaker engagement in decision making is a key step in the development of a structured, patient-centered SDM approach. Intervention early in the decision process, the use of individualized decision aids that employ graphic risk presentations, and a dedicated decisional coach were identified by patients and providers as approaches with a high potential for success. The impact of such a formalized shared decision making process in cardiac surgery on decisional quality will need to be formally assessed. Given the trend toward older and frail patients referred for complex cardiac procedures, the need for an effective shared decision making process is compelling.

Entities:  

Keywords:  decision aids; health literacy; patient decision making; qualitative methods; shared decision making

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27803362     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X16675338

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  7 in total

1.  How Can We Optimize Care and Outcomes for Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment and Acute Myocardial Infarction?

Authors:  Ariel R Green
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Recommendations for Preoperative Assessment and Shared Decision-Making in Cardiac Surgery.

Authors:  Maks Mihalj; Thierry Carrel; Richard D Urman; Frank Stueber; Markus M Luedi
Journal:  Curr Anesthesiol Rep       Date:  2020-03-04

3.  Effect of an mHealth self-help intervention on readmission after adult cardiac surgery: Protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Rochelle Wynne; Joanne Nolte; Stacey Matthews; Jennifer Angel; Ann Le; Andrew Moore; Tina Campbell; Caleb Ferguson
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2021-11-28       Impact factor: 3.057

4.  Patient Perspectives to Inform a Health Literacy Educational Program: A Systematic Review and Thematic Synthesis of Qualitative Studies.

Authors:  Margot Jager; Janine de Zeeuw; Janne Tullius; Roberta Papa; Cinzia Giammarchi; Amanda Whittal; Andrea F de Winter
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Decision making in treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis: a survey study in Dutch heart centres.

Authors:  J J A M van Beek-Peeters; Z van den Ende; M C Faes; A J B M de Vos; M W A van Geldorp; B J L Van den Branden; B J M van der Meer; M M N Minkman
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2022-04-05       Impact factor: 2.854

Review 6.  Shared decision making in surgery: a scoping review of patient and surgeon preferences.

Authors:  Laura A Shinkunas; Caleb J Klipowicz; Erica M Carlisle
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 2.796

7.  Association between preoperative frailty and outcomes among adults undergoing cardiac surgery: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Carmel Montgomery; Henry Stelfox; Colleen Norris; Darryl Rolfson; Steven Meyer; Mohamad Zibdawi; Sean Bagshaw
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2021-07-20
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.