Literature DB >> 30733208

Short Graphic Values History Tool for decision making during serious illness.

John J You1, Peter Allatt2, Michelle Howard3, Carole A Robinson4, Jessica Simon5, Rebecca Sudore6, Amy Tan7, Carrie Bernard8,9, Marilyn Swinton10, Xuran Jiang11, Doug Klein12, Michael McKenzie13, Gillian Fyles14, Daren Keith Heyland15.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a values clarification tool, the Short Graphic Values History Tool (GVHT), designed to support person-centred decision making during serious illness.
METHODS: The development phase included input from experts and laypersons and assessed acceptability with patients/family members. In the validation phase, we recruited additional participants into a before-after study. Our primary validation hypothesis was that the tool would reduce scores on the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) at 1-2 weeks of follow-up. Our secondary validation hypotheses were that the tool would improve values clarity (reduce scores) more than other DCS subscales and increase engagement in advance care planning (ACP) processes related to identification and discussion of one's values.
RESULTS: In the development phase, the tool received positive overall ratings from 22 patients/family members in hospital (mean score 4.3; 1=very poor; 5=very good) and family practice (mean score 4.5) settings. In the validation phase, we enrolled 157 patients (mean age 71.8 years) from family practice, cancer clinic and hospital settings. After tool completion, decisional conflict decreased (-6.7 points, 95% CI -11.1 to -2.3, p=0.003; 0-100 scale; N=100), with the most improvement seen in the values clarity subscale (-10.0 points, 95% CI -17.3 to -2.7, p=0.008; N=100), and the ACP-Values process score increased (+0.4 points, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.6, p=0.001; 1-5 scale; N=61).
CONCLUSIONS: The Short GVHT is acceptable to end users and has some measure of validity. Further study to evaluate its impact on decision making during serious illness is warranted. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical decisions; communication; questionnaire; validation; values

Year:  2019        PMID: 30733208     DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2018-001698

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ Support Palliat Care        ISSN: 2045-435X            Impact factor:   3.568


  3 in total

1.  Decisional Satisfaction, Regret, and Conflict Among Parents of Infants with Neurologic Conditions.

Authors:  Margaret H Barlet; Peter A Ubel; Kevin P Weinfurt; Hannah C Glass; Kathryn I Pollak; Debra H Brandon; Monica E Lemmon
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2022-02-26       Impact factor: 6.314

2.  Decision Making for Infants With Neurologic Conditions.

Authors:  Charlotte Gerrity; Samantha Farley; Mary C Barks; Peter A Ubel; Debra Brandon; Kathryn I Pollak; Monica E Lemmon
Journal:  J Child Neurol       Date:  2022-02-08       Impact factor: 2.363

3.  Jesus Practiced Advance Care Planning: Biblical Basis and Possible Applications.

Authors:  Grace Johnston
Journal:  Palliat Med Rep       Date:  2020-10-22
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.