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

IF 2.1 PEC innovation Pub Date : 2024-12-15 Epub Date: 2024-10-21 DOI:10.1016/j.pecinn.2024.100352
Caroline Gurtner , Jos M.G.A. Schols , Christa Lohrmann , Sabine Hahn
{"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 ,&nbsp;Jos M.G.A. Schols ,&nbsp;Christa Lohrmann ,&nbsp;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":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-15","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 ,&nbsp;Jos M.G.A. Schols ,&nbsp;Christa Lohrmann ,&nbsp;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\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-15\",\"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\":\"2024/10/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"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":"2024/10/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的共同决策是促进康复和以人为本的护理的一种有前途的方法,但在临床实践中实施起来似乎具有挑战性。本研究旨在探讨患者和医护人员如何体验共同决策,以及其促进因素和障碍。研究方法:本研究选择了多重定性案例研究设计,并采用了恒定比较法。研究使用了多种数据来源,包括个人访谈、观察、文件分析和焦点小组。结果通过首先进行病例内部分析,然后进行交叉分析,构建了四种病人特征及其共同决策的可能性。结果表明,在精神科住院病人的日常生活中,尽管医护人员主张共同决策是最受欢迎的方法,但他们还是采用了不同的决策形式。患者对共同决策的期望和看法也各不相同,这反映在他们的参与程度上。创新该研究发现了急诊精神病住院环境中的不同决策形式,凸显了所倡导的 SDM 方法与其实际执行之间的差距。这种差异是一个关键方面,因为它强调了在实际临床环境中实施 SDM 的复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PEC innovation
PEC innovation Medicine and Dentistry (General)
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
147 days
期刊最新文献
A feasibility pilot trial to deliver a virtual intervention for promoting daily self-management in adolescents and young adults with cystic fibrosis: A brief report of tele-coach outcomes Development and Piloting of a Web-based Adaptation of Motivational Interviewing to Promote Oral Health Using epigenetic aging data to drive health behavior change Coproducing an intervention to support stroke unit staff to provide information about recovery to patients and carers Decision-making and psychological outcomes in women with breast cancer: Insights into the choice against fertility preservation and implications for supportive care
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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