Literature DB >> 28234848

Shared Decision-Making in the Management of Congenital Vascular Malformations.

Sophie E R Horbach1, Dirk T Ubbink, Fabienne E Stubenrouch, Mark J W Koelemay, Carine J M van der Vleuten, Bas H Verhoeven, Jim A Reekers, Leo J Schultze Kool, Chantal M A M van der Horst.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In shared decision-making, clinicians and patients arrive at a joint treatment decision, by incorporating best available evidence and the patients' personal values and preferences. Little is known about the role of shared decision-making in managing patients with congenital vascular malformations, for which preference-sensitive decision-making seems obvious. The authors investigated preferences regarding decision-making and current shared decision-making behavior during physician-patient encounters.
METHODS: In two Dutch university hospitals, adults and children with congenital vascular malformations facing a treatment-related decision were enrolled. Before the consultation, patients (or parents of children) expressed their preference regarding decision-making (Control Preferences Scale). Afterward, participants completed shared decision-making-specific questionnaires (nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire, CollaboRATE, and satisfaction), and physicians completed the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire-Physician questionnaire. Consultations were audiotaped and patient involvement was scored by two independent researchers using the five-item Observing Patient Involvement instrument. All questionnaire results were expressed on a scale of 0 to 100 (optimum shared decision-making).
RESULTS: Fifty-five participants (24 parents and 31 adult patients) were included. Two-thirds preferred the shared decision-making approach (Control Preferences Scale). Objective five-item Observing Patient Involvement scores were low (mean ± SD, 31 ± 15), whereas patient and physician Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire scores were high, with means of 68 ± 18 and 68 ± 19, respectively. The median CollaboRATE score was 93. There was no clear relationship between shared decision-making and satisfaction scores.
CONCLUSIONS: Although adults and parents of children with vascular malformations express a strong desire for shared decision-making, objective shared decision-making behavior is still lacking, most likely because of poor awareness of the shared decision-making concept among patients, parents, and physicians. To improve shared decision-making practice, targeted interventions (e.g., decision aids, staff training) are essential.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28234848     DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003083

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  5 in total

1.  Clinician-created educational video for shared decision-making in the outpatient management of acne.

Authors:  Chih-Tsung Hung; Yi-Hsien Chen; Tzu-Ling Hung; Chien-Ping Chiang; Chih-Yu Chen; Wei-Ming Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 3.752

2.  Quality and readability of online patient information regarding sclerotherapy for venous malformations.

Authors:  Jonathan H Pass; Amani H Patel; Sam Stuart; Alex M Barnacle; Premal A Patel
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2018-02-02

3.  Association of shared decision making with inpatient satisfaction: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Huiwen Luo; Guohua Liu; Jing Lu; Di Xue
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2021-01-25       Impact factor: 2.796

4.  The current extent of and need for shared decision making in atopic dermatitis and psoriasis in the Netherlands: an online survey study amongst patients and physicians.

Authors:  G E van der Kraaij; F M Vermeulen; P M G Smeets; E M A Smets; P I Spuls
Journal:  J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 6.166

5.  The content and conduct of GP consultations for dermatology problems: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Emma Le Roux; Peter J Edwards; Emily Sanderson; Rebecca K Barnes; Matthew J Ridd
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 5.386

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.