Browsing by keyword "Shared decision-making"
Now showing items 1-3 of 3
-
Prognostic Uncertainty in Critically Ill Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury: A Multicenter Qualitative StudyBACKGROUND: Prognostic uncertainty is frequently cited as a barrier to communication between physicians and patients and is particularly burdensome for surrogate decision-makers, who must make choices on behalf of their incapacitated family members. The Conceptual Taxonomy of Uncertainty is one model through which physician and surrogate communication can be analyzed to identify strategies for reducing uncertainty in surrogate decision-making. Our objective was to examine themes of uncertainty in physician communication of prognosis and surrogate goals-of-care decision-making for critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of a previous qualitative study that involved semistructured interviews of 16 surrogates of critically ill patients with TBI from two level 1 trauma centers and 20 TBI expert physicians from seven trauma centers. Open-ended questions about prognostic uncertainty were asked. We identified major themes with an inductive approach. The Conceptual Taxonomy of Uncertainty was applied to further characterize these themes as data-centered, system-centered, and patient-centered issues of uncertainty. RESULTS: Nearly all surrogates (15 of 16) and physicians (19 of 20) recognized the emotional burden of uncertainty in the decision-making process for surrogates. More than three quarters of surrogates (13 of 16) described instances in which a lack of information regarding their loved one's disease or prognosis created uncertainty in their decision-making process, identifying both positive and negative instances of prognostic communication by physicians. We found that physicians used one of three strategies to communicate prognostic uncertainty to surrogates: leaving no room for uncertainty, honesty about uncertainty, and range of possibilities. These strategies did not meet the communication preferences of the majority of surrogates, with more than a third of decision-makers (6 of 15) being frustrated by too much ambiguity about prognosis as well as the failure to acknowledge the existence of uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: We found that physician communication strategies rarely addressed surrogate needs regarding uncertainty adequately, suggesting an urgent need for future research into improved communication of prognostic uncertainty.
-
Society of Behavioral Medicine supports implementation of high quality lung cancer screening in high-risk populationsThe Society of Behavioral Medicine (SBM) supports the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening of the chest for eligible populations to reduce lung cancer mortality. Consistent with efforts to translate research findings into real-world settings, SBM encourages health-care providers and health-care systems to (1) integrate evidence-based tobacco treatment as an essential component of LDCT-based lung cancer screening, (2) examine the structural barriers that may impact screening uptake, and (3) incorporate shared decision-making as a clinical platform to facilitate consultations and engagement with individuals at high risk for lung cancer about the potential benefits and harms associated with participation in a lung cancer screening program. We advise policy makers and legislators to support screening in high-risk populations by continuing to (1) expand access to high quality LDCT-based screening among underserved high-risk populations, (2) enhance cost-effectiveness by integrating evidence-based tobacco treatments into screening in high-risk populations, and (3) increase funding for research that explores implementation science and increased public awareness and access of diverse populations to participate in clinical and translational research.
-
Translating clinical and patient-reported data to tailored shared decision reports with predictive analytics for knee and hip arthritisINTRODUCTION: New informatics tools can transform evidence-based information to individualized predictive reports to serve shared decisions in clinic. We developed a web-based system to collect patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and medical risk factors and to compare responses to national registry data. The system generates predicted outcomes for individual patients and a report for use in clinic to support decisions. We present the report development, presentation, and early experience implementing this PRO-based, shared decision report for knee and hip arthritis patients seeking orthopedic evaluation. METHODS: Iterative patient and clinician interviews defined report content and visual display. The web-system supports: (a) collection of PROs and risk data at home or in office, (b) automated statistical processing of responses compared to national data, (c) individualized estimates of likely pain relief and functional gain if surgery is elected, and (d) graphical reports to support shared decisions. The system was implemented at 12 sites with 26 surgeons in an ongoing cluster randomized trial. RESULTS: Clinicians and patients recommended that pain and function as well as clinical risk factors (e.g., BMI, smoking) be presented to frame the discussion. Color and graphics support patient understanding. To date, 7891 patients completed the assessment before the visit and 56% consented to study participation. Reports were generated for 98% of patients and 68% of patients recalled reviewing the report with their surgeon. CONCLUSIONS: Informatics solutions can generate timely, tailored office reports including PROs and predictive analytics. Patients successfully complete the pre-visit PRO assessments and clinicians and patients value the report to support shared surgical decisions.
