Cancer medicine · 2023
Feeling known and informed: Serial qualitative interviews evaluating a consultation support intervention for patients with high-grade glioma.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Shepherd Sarah C, Hacking Belinda, Wallace Louise M, Murdoch Sarah E, Belkora Jeff
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Interventions to support patients' engagement in shared decision making (SDM) are lacking within high-grade glioma (HGG) healthcare. Consultation Planning, Recording and Summarising (CPRS) has shown evidence of increasing patient decision self-efficacy, reducing uncertainty, and regret of decisions. This is the first study of CPRS within a HGG population and delivered over serial medical consultations.
METHOD: A one-arm prospective qualitative longitudinal design was used to evaluate the CPRS intervention and evaluated with participants at sequential clinic appointments depending on their care, in Edinburgh, Scotland. We report on serial semi structured interviews of 16 patients and their partners.
RESULTS: Consultation planning before the consultation supported patients to feel known by strengthening the patient voice within the consultation. It prepared patients to actively participate in the consultation, despite the distressing nature of the content. Recording and summarising supported patients to understand their situation. The provision of a consultation record enabled accurate recall, a paced uptake of information and supported the family to feel fully informed. Ultimately, patients understood why decisions were being made rather than being part of making decisions.
CONCLUSIONS: The CPRS intervention helped patients to understand and to feel known by increasing patient capacity for communication in the consultation, with support before, during, and after the consultation. The intervention focused on preparing patients for SDM but patients did not perceive that they had meaningful choices to make. Further research could look at the inclusion of patient decision aids to support this process.
METHOD: A one-arm prospective qualitative longitudinal design was used to evaluate the CPRS intervention and evaluated with participants at sequential clinic appointments depending on their care, in Edinburgh, Scotland. We report on serial semi structured interviews of 16 patients and their partners.
RESULTS: Consultation planning before the consultation supported patients to feel known by strengthening the patient voice within the consultation. It prepared patients to actively participate in the consultation, despite the distressing nature of the content. Recording and summarising supported patients to understand their situation. The provision of a consultation record enabled accurate recall, a paced uptake of information and supported the family to feel fully informed. Ultimately, patients understood why decisions were being made rather than being part of making decisions.
CONCLUSIONS: The CPRS intervention helped patients to understand and to feel known by increasing patient capacity for communication in the consultation, with support before, during, and after the consultation. The intervention focused on preparing patients for SDM but patients did not perceive that they had meaningful choices to make. Further research could look at the inclusion of patient decision aids to support this process.