Literature DB >> 33712309

High-risk surgery among older adults: Not-quite shared decision-making.

Ana C De Roo1, Crystal Ann Vitous2, Samantha J Rivard3, Michaela C Bamdad4, Sara M Jafri5, Mary E Byrnes6, Pasithorn A Suwanabol7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making is critical to optimal patient-centered care. For elective operations, when there is sufficient time for deliberate discussion, little is known about how surgeons navigate decision-making and how surgeons align care with patient preferences. In this context, we sought to explore surgeons' approaches to decision-making for adults ≥65 years at high-risk of postoperative complications or death.
METHODS: We conducted semistructured in-depth interviews with 46 practicing surgeons across Michigan. Transcripts were iteratively analyzed through steps informed by inductive thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Four major themes emerged characterizing how surgeons approach high-risk surgical decision-making for older adults: (1) risk assessment was defined as the process used by surgeons to identify and analyze factors that may negatively impact outcome; (2) expectations and goals described the process of surgeons engaging with patients and families to discuss potential outcomes and desired objectives; (3) external and internal motivating factors outlined extrinsic dynamics (eg, quality metrics, referrals) and intrinsic drivers (eg, surgeons' personal experiences) that influenced high-risk decision-making; and (4) decision-making approaches and challenges encompassed the roles of patients and surgeons and obstacles to engaging in a true shared decision-making process.
CONCLUSION: Although shared decision-making is strongly recommended, we found that surgeons who perform high-risk operations among older adults predominantly focused on assessing risk and setting expectations with patients and families rather than inviting them to actively participate in the decision-making process. Surgeons also reported influences on decision-making from quality metrics, referrals, and personal experiences. Patient involvement, however, was seldom discussed suggesting that surgeons may not be engaging in true shared decision-making when benefits should be weighed against a high likelihood of harm.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33712309      PMCID: PMC8405456          DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2021.02.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surgery        ISSN: 0039-6060            Impact factor:   4.348


  44 in total

1.  The shared decision-making continuum.

Authors:  Alexander A Kon
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2010-08-25       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango).

Authors:  C Charles; A Gafni; T Whelan
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  The Control Preferences Scale.

Authors:  L F Degner; J A Sloan; P Venkatesh
Journal:  Can J Nurs Res       Date:  1997

Review 4.  Decisional Conflict Scale Use over 20 Years: The Anniversary Review.

Authors:  Mirjam M Garvelink; Laura Boland; Krystal Klein; Don Vu Nguyen; Matthew Menear; Hilary L Bekker; Karen B Eden; Annie LeBlanc; Annette M O'Connor; Dawn Stacey; France Légaré
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2019-05-29       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Development of a list of high-risk operations for patients 65 years and older.

Authors:  Margaret L Schwarze; Amber E Barnato; Paul J Rathouz; Qianqian Zhao; Heather B Neuman; Emily R Winslow; Gregory D Kennedy; Yue-Yung Hu; Christopher M Dodgion; Alvin C Kwok; Caprice C Greenberg
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 14.766

6.  Perceptions of Urologists About the Conversational Elements Leading to Treatment Decision-Making Among Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Prajakta Adsul; Ricardo Wray; Danielle Boyd; Nancy Weaver; Sameer Siddiqui
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 7.  Knowledge is not power for patients: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of patient-reported barriers and facilitators to shared decision making.

Authors:  Natalie Joseph-Williams; Glyn Elwyn; Adrian Edwards
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2013-11-09

8.  Surgeons' Views on Shared Decision-Making.

Authors:  Suraj Kannan; Jayhyun Seo; Kevin R Riggs; Gail Geller; Emily F Boss; Zackary D Berger
Journal:  J Patient Cent Res Rev       Date:  2020-01-27

Review 9.  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

10.  A three-talk model for shared decision making: multistage consultation process.

Authors:  Glyn Elwyn; Marie Anne Durand; Julia Song; Johanna Aarts; Paul J Barr; Zackary Berger; Nan Cochran; Dominick Frosch; Dariusz Galasiński; Pål Gulbrandsen; Paul K J Han; Martin Härter; Paul Kinnersley; Amy Lloyd; Manish Mishra; Lilisbeth Perestelo-Perez; Isabelle Scholl; Kounosuke Tomori; Lyndal Trevena; Holly O Witteman; Trudy Van der Weijden
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2017-11-06
View more
  2 in total

1.  Managing Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischaemia in Patients at the Extremes of Older Age Requires a Patient-Focused Approach.

Authors:  Carina Cutmore; Sarah Aitken
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2022-08-18       Impact factor: 3.282

2.  Surgeons' Perspective of Decision Making in Recurrent Diverticulitis: A Qualitative Analysis.

Authors:  Alexander T Hawkins; Russell Rothman; Timothy M Geiger; Kemberlee R Bonnet; Matthew G Mutch; Scott E Regenbogen; David G Schlundt; David F Penson
Journal:  Ann Surg Open       Date:  2022-05-04
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.