Development of Worksheets for Immunomodulator Shared Decision-Making to Facilitate Patient-Clinician Communication: A Quality Improvement Project Employing Design Thinking Principles.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 RHEUMATOLOGY JCR: Journal of Clinical Rheumatology Pub Date : 2024-10-30 DOI:10.1097/RHU.0000000000002155
Bharat Kumar, Ayesha Iftekhar, Ruoning Ni, Alick Feng, Gatr-Alnada Gheriani, Ibiyemi Oke, Amir Abidov, Lindsay Moy, Craig T Morita, Kristina Cobb, Erica Sigwarth, Melissa Swee
{"title":"Development of Worksheets for Immunomodulator Shared Decision-Making to Facilitate Patient-Clinician Communication: A Quality Improvement Project Employing Design Thinking Principles.","authors":"Bharat Kumar, Ayesha Iftekhar, Ruoning Ni, Alick Feng, Gatr-Alnada Gheriani, Ibiyemi Oke, Amir Abidov, Lindsay Moy, Craig T Morita, Kristina Cobb, Erica Sigwarth, Melissa Swee","doi":"10.1097/RHU.0000000000002155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Shared decision-making (SDM) is a principle of humanistic, patient-centered health care within the field of rheumatology. However, clear communication between patients and their clinicians regarding the benefits and risks of immunomodulators may be challenging in a clinical setting. The design-thinking process is a human-centered approach to quality improvement that can help to identify insights to uphold high-quality communication.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The development process adhered to the Stanford design thinking process framework, encompassing 5 stages: (1) empathize, (2) define, (3) ideate, (4) prototype, and (5) test. During the empathy stage, quality improvement members spent 4 hours immersed in the clinical setting observing how patients and clinicians engage in SDM conversations. These observations were augmented by unstructured debriefing sessions to better understand the needs and drivers of high-quality SDM. Following this, a rapid ideation workshop was convened to generate creative solutions. These led to rapid prototyping and testing, yielding a final product.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The iterative design process identified 4 critical needs: (1) ensuring comprehensibility of materials, (2) upholding accuracy of information, (3) balancing standardization with individualization, and (4) promoting retention of knowledge. During the rapid ideation workshop, the concept of a Worksheet for Immunomodulator Shared Decision-Making (WISDM) was introduced and selected for further elaboration. This led to the creation of 5 prototypes for methotrexate, which were subsequently tested. These were reconciled and modified to make a final product.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The WISDM template contains 7 elements that support SDM. Forty-five WISDMs were created for 23 immunomodulators. Further investigation will focus on how WISDMs exactly impact SDM.</p>","PeriodicalId":14745,"journal":{"name":"JCR: Journal of Clinical Rheumatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCR: Journal of Clinical Rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RHU.0000000000002155","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) is a principle of humanistic, patient-centered health care within the field of rheumatology. However, clear communication between patients and their clinicians regarding the benefits and risks of immunomodulators may be challenging in a clinical setting. The design-thinking process is a human-centered approach to quality improvement that can help to identify insights to uphold high-quality communication.

Methods: The development process adhered to the Stanford design thinking process framework, encompassing 5 stages: (1) empathize, (2) define, (3) ideate, (4) prototype, and (5) test. During the empathy stage, quality improvement members spent 4 hours immersed in the clinical setting observing how patients and clinicians engage in SDM conversations. These observations were augmented by unstructured debriefing sessions to better understand the needs and drivers of high-quality SDM. Following this, a rapid ideation workshop was convened to generate creative solutions. These led to rapid prototyping and testing, yielding a final product.

Results: The iterative design process identified 4 critical needs: (1) ensuring comprehensibility of materials, (2) upholding accuracy of information, (3) balancing standardization with individualization, and (4) promoting retention of knowledge. During the rapid ideation workshop, the concept of a Worksheet for Immunomodulator Shared Decision-Making (WISDM) was introduced and selected for further elaboration. This led to the creation of 5 prototypes for methotrexate, which were subsequently tested. These were reconciled and modified to make a final product.

Conclusion: The WISDM template contains 7 elements that support SDM. Forty-five WISDMs were created for 23 immunomodulators. Further investigation will focus on how WISDMs exactly impact SDM.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
开发免疫调节剂共同决策工作表,促进患者与医生之间的沟通:运用设计思维原则的质量改进项目。
背景:共同决策(SDM共同决策(SDM)是风湿病学领域以人为本的医疗保健原则。然而,在临床环境中,患者与临床医生就免疫调节剂的益处和风险进行清晰的沟通可能具有挑战性。设计思考过程是一种以人为本的质量改进方法,有助于发现坚持高质量沟通的真知灼见:开发流程遵循斯坦福设计思维流程框架,包括 5 个阶段:(1)共鸣;(2)定义;(3)构思;(4)原型;(5)测试。在移情阶段,质量改进小组成员花了 4 个小时在临床环境中观察病人和临床医生如何进行 SDM 对话。为了更好地了解高质量 SDM 的需求和驱动因素,他们还进行了非结构化汇报。随后,召开了一次快速构思研讨会,以提出创造性的解决方案。这些方案促成了快速原型设计和测试,并产生了最终产品:迭代设计过程确定了 4 项关键需求:(1) 确保材料的可理解性,(2) 维护信息的准确性,(3) 平衡标准化与个性化,以及 (4) 促进知识的保留。在快速构思研讨会上,提出了 "免疫调节剂共同决策工作表"(WISDM)的概念,并被选中作进一步阐述。由此产生了 5 个甲氨蝶呤原型,随后进行了测试。这些原型经过协调和修改后成为最终产品:WISDM 模板包含支持 SDM 的 7 个要素。为 23 种免疫调节剂创建了 45 个 WISDM。进一步的调查将侧重于 WISDM 如何确切影响 SDM。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
228
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JCR: Journal of Clinical Rheumatology the peer-reviewed, bimonthly journal that rheumatologists asked for. Each issue contains practical information on patient care in a clinically oriented, easy-to-read format. Our commitment is to timely, relevant coverage of the topics and issues shaping current practice. We pack each issue with original articles, case reports, reviews, brief reports, expert commentary, letters to the editor, and more. This is where you''ll find the answers to tough patient management issues as well as the latest information about technological advances affecting your practice.
期刊最新文献
Intraosseous Rheumatoid Nodule. New Diagnoses of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Early in the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of a Large United States Commercial Insurance Database. Preliminary Evaluation for the Development of a Scoring System to Predict Homozygous M694V Genotype in Familial Mediterranean Fever Patients: A Single-Center Study. Genetic Risk Scores for the Clinical Rheumatologist. Hypervirulent Klebsiella pneumoniae in Rheumatoid Arthritis on Abatacept.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1