{"title":"病人和医护人员对精神病住院患者共同决策的看法--一项多重定性案例研究","authors":"Caroline Gurtner , Jos M.G.A. Schols , Christa Lohrmann , Sabine Hahn","doi":"10.1016/j.pecinn.2024.100352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Shared decision-making is one promising approach to promoting recovery and person-centred care but seems challenging for implementation in clinical practice. This study aimed to explore how patients and health professionals experience shared decision-making and its facilitators and barriers.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A multiple qualitative case study design was chosen, using a constant comparative method. Multiple data sources were used, including individual interviews, observation, document analysis and a focus group.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Through first a within-case analysis and then second a cross-case analysis, four patient profiles and their potential for shared decision-making were constructed. The results indicate that in the daily routine of the psychiatric inpatient setting different forms of decision making are used, even though health professionals advocate shared decision-making as the favored approach. Patients also have varying expectations and perceptions regarding shared decision-making, which is reflected in the degree of their involvement.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Shared decision-making could be enhanced in the future by a more proactive communication style and the proactive provision of information on the part of health professionals, in order to enhance patient participation in decision-making.</div></div><div><h3>Innovation</h3><div>The study identified different forms of decision-making within the acute psychiatric inpatient setting, highlighting the gap between the advocated SDM approach and its practical implementation. This divergence is a key aspect, as it underlines the complexity of implementing SDM in real clinical settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74407,"journal":{"name":"PEC innovation","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100352"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patients' and health professionals' perspectives regarding shared decision making in the psychiatric inpatient setting – A multiple qualitative case study\",\"authors\":\"Caroline Gurtner , Jos M.G.A. Schols , Christa Lohrmann , Sabine Hahn\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pecinn.2024.100352\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Shared decision-making is one promising approach to promoting recovery and person-centred care but seems challenging for implementation in clinical practice. This study aimed to explore how patients and health professionals experience shared decision-making and its facilitators and barriers.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A multiple qualitative case study design was chosen, using a constant comparative method. Multiple data sources were used, including individual interviews, observation, document analysis and a focus group.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Through first a within-case analysis and then second a cross-case analysis, four patient profiles and their potential for shared decision-making were constructed. The results indicate that in the daily routine of the psychiatric inpatient setting different forms of decision making are used, even though health professionals advocate shared decision-making as the favored approach. Patients also have varying expectations and perceptions regarding shared decision-making, which is reflected in the degree of their involvement.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Shared decision-making could be enhanced in the future by a more proactive communication style and the proactive provision of information on the part of health professionals, in order to enhance patient participation in decision-making.</div></div><div><h3>Innovation</h3><div>The study identified different forms of decision-making within the acute psychiatric inpatient setting, highlighting the gap between the advocated SDM approach and its practical implementation. This divergence is a key aspect, as it underlines the complexity of implementing SDM in real clinical settings.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74407,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PEC innovation\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100352\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PEC innovation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772628224001006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PEC innovation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772628224001006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Patients' and health professionals' perspectives regarding shared decision making in the psychiatric inpatient setting – A multiple qualitative case study
Objective
Shared decision-making is one promising approach to promoting recovery and person-centred care but seems challenging for implementation in clinical practice. This study aimed to explore how patients and health professionals experience shared decision-making and its facilitators and barriers.
Methods
A multiple qualitative case study design was chosen, using a constant comparative method. Multiple data sources were used, including individual interviews, observation, document analysis and a focus group.
Results
Through first a within-case analysis and then second a cross-case analysis, four patient profiles and their potential for shared decision-making were constructed. The results indicate that in the daily routine of the psychiatric inpatient setting different forms of decision making are used, even though health professionals advocate shared decision-making as the favored approach. Patients also have varying expectations and perceptions regarding shared decision-making, which is reflected in the degree of their involvement.
Conclusion
Shared decision-making could be enhanced in the future by a more proactive communication style and the proactive provision of information on the part of health professionals, in order to enhance patient participation in decision-making.
Innovation
The study identified different forms of decision-making within the acute psychiatric inpatient setting, highlighting the gap between the advocated SDM approach and its practical implementation. This divergence is a key aspect, as it underlines the complexity of implementing SDM in real clinical settings.