Winnie C Chi1, Jennifer Wolff2, Raquel Greer3, Sydney Dy2. 1. RTI International, Washington, DC wchi@rti.org. 2. Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Understanding individuals' preferences for participating in health care decisions is foundational to delivering person-centered care. We aimed to (1) explore preferences for health care decision making among older adults, and (2) identify multimorbidity profiles associated with preferring less active, ie, passive, participation among older US adults. METHOD: Ours was a cross-sectional, nationally representative study of 2,017 National Health and Aging Trends Study respondents. Passive decision-making preference was defined as preferring to leave decisions to physicians. Multimorbidity profiles, based on 13 prevalent chronic conditions, were examined as (1) presence of 2 or more conditions, (2) a simple conditions count, and (3) a condition clusters count. Multiple logistic regression was used with adjustment for age, sex, education, English proficiency, and mobility limitation. RESULTS: Most older adults preferred to participate actively in making health care decisions. Older adults with 4 or more conditions, however, and those with multiple condition clusters are relatively less likely to prefer active decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians should initiate a shared decision-making process with older adults with 4 or more conditions or multiple condition clusters. Physicians should anticipate variation in decision-making preferences among older adults and adapt a decision-making process that suits individuals' preferences for participation to ensure person-centered care delivery.
PURPOSE: Understanding individuals' preferences for participating in health care decisions is foundational to delivering person-centered care. We aimed to (1) explore preferences for health care decision making among older adults, and (2) identify multimorbidity profiles associated with preferring less active, ie, passive, participation among older US adults. METHOD: Ours was a cross-sectional, nationally representative study of 2,017 National Health and Aging Trends Study respondents. Passive decision-making preference was defined as preferring to leave decisions to physicians. Multimorbidity profiles, based on 13 prevalent chronic conditions, were examined as (1) presence of 2 or more conditions, (2) a simple conditions count, and (3) a condition clusters count. Multiple logistic regression was used with adjustment for age, sex, education, English proficiency, and mobility limitation. RESULTS: Most older adults preferred to participate actively in making health care decisions. Older adults with 4 or more conditions, however, and those with multiple condition clusters are relatively less likely to prefer active decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians should initiate a shared decision-making process with older adults with 4 or more conditions or multiple condition clusters. Physicians should anticipate variation in decision-making preferences among older adults and adapt a decision-making process that suits individuals' preferences for participation to ensure person-centered care delivery.
Authors: Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Mick P Couper; Eleanor Singer; Carrie A Levin; Floyd J Fowler; Sonja Ziniel; Peter A Ubel; Angela Fagerlin Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2010-04-14 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: David Arterburn; Robert Wellman; Emily Westbrook; Carolyn Rutter; Tyler Ross; David McCulloch; Matthew Handley; Charles Jung Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Christiane Muth; Marjan van den Akker; Jeanet W Blom; Christian D Mallen; Justine Rochon; François G Schellevis; Annette Becker; Martin Beyer; Jochen Gensichen; Hanna Kirchner; Rafael Perera; Alexandra Prados-Torres; Martin Scherer; Ulrich Thiem; Hendrik van den Bussche; Paul P Glasziou Journal: BMC Med Date: 2014-12-08 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Emily Reeve; Jennifer L Wolff; Maureen Skehan; Elizabeth A Bayliss; Sarah N Hilmer; Cynthia M Boyd Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Marjan van den Akker; Bert Vaes; Geert Goderis; Gijs Van Pottelbergh; Tine De Burghgraeve; Séverine Henrard Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-02-12 Impact factor: 3.240