Patient education and counseling · 2017
PCI Choice: Cardiovascular clinicians' perceptions of shared decision making in stable coronary artery disease.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Coylewright Megan, O'Neill Elizabeth S, Dick Sara, Grande Stuart W
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Describe cardiovascular clinicians' perceptions of Shared Decision Making following use of a decision aid (DA) for stable coronary artery disease (CAD) "PCI Choice", in a randomized controlled trial.
METHODS: We conducted a semi-structured qualitative interview study with cardiologists and physician extenders (n=13) after using PCI Choice in practice. Interviews were transcribed then coded. Codes were organized into salient themes. Final themes were determined by consensus with all authors.
RESULTS: Most clinicians (70%) had no prior knowledge of SDM or DAs. Mixed views about the role of the DA in the visit were related to misconceptions of how patient education differed from SDM. Qualitative assessment of clinician perceptions generated three themes: 1) Gaps exist in clinician knowledge around SDM; 2) Clinicians are often uncomfortable with modifying baseline practice; and 3) Clinicians express interest in using DAs after initial exposure within a research setting.
CONCLUSIONS: Use of DAs by clinicians during clinic visits may improve understanding of SDM. Initial use is marked by a reluctance to modify established practice patterns.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: As clinicians explore new approaches to benefit their patients, there is an opportunity for DAs that provide clinician instruction on core elements of SDM to lead to enhanced SDM in clinical practice.
METHODS: We conducted a semi-structured qualitative interview study with cardiologists and physician extenders (n=13) after using PCI Choice in practice. Interviews were transcribed then coded. Codes were organized into salient themes. Final themes were determined by consensus with all authors.
RESULTS: Most clinicians (70%) had no prior knowledge of SDM or DAs. Mixed views about the role of the DA in the visit were related to misconceptions of how patient education differed from SDM. Qualitative assessment of clinician perceptions generated three themes: 1) Gaps exist in clinician knowledge around SDM; 2) Clinicians are often uncomfortable with modifying baseline practice; and 3) Clinicians express interest in using DAs after initial exposure within a research setting.
CONCLUSIONS: Use of DAs by clinicians during clinic visits may improve understanding of SDM. Initial use is marked by a reluctance to modify established practice patterns.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: As clinicians explore new approaches to benefit their patients, there is an opportunity for DAs that provide clinician instruction on core elements of SDM to lead to enhanced SDM in clinical practice.