Patients' preferences on information and involvement in decision-making in gastrointestinal surgery

Contexte et but de l'étude: La relation médecin-patient a subi d'importants changements et l'actuelle émancipation des patients a conduit à un véritable partenariat dans la prise de décisions thérapeutiques. Notre étude a pour but de déterminer les préférences des patients pour différents aspects de la prise de décisions au cours d'un traitement et de ses potentielles complications, de même que la quantité et le type d'information souhaitée avant une intervention chirurgicale digestive. Patients et méthodes : Il s'agit d'une étude prospective non-randomisée basée sur un questionnaire donné lors de la consultation préopératoire à 254 patients consécutifs prévus pour une chirurgie gastro-intestinale élective. Résultats : Pour les potentielles complications chirurgicales et la possibilité d'un séjour aux soins intensifs, 64% des patients souhaitent participer activement aux décisions médicales, et respectivement 89% et 60% des patients aimeraient discuter d'une éventuelle réanimation cardio-pulmonaire et de limitations au traitement. Respectivement 73%, 77% et 47% des patients ont souhaité une information très détaillée, une infoimation pour une possible hospitalisation en soins intensifs ou une éventuelle réanimation cardiaque. Les patients âgés ou avec un niveau de formation bas étaient significativement moins intéressés à une prise de décision partagée (p=0.003 et 0.015) et à une information complète (p=0.03 et 0.05), De plus, l'implication des familles dans les prises de décision n'était favorisée que si le patient est en coma (74%), et significativement moins importante chez les personnes âgées et de sexe masculin (p=0.04 et 0.03 respectivement). Ni le type de chirurgie prévue (majeure ou mineure) ni la sévérité de la pathologie (cancer ou non) ne furent des facteurs statistiquement significatifs pour un désir plus élevé de partager la prise de décision, pour plus d'information ou pour impliquer d'avantage la famille. Conclusions : Notre étude démontre que la majorité des patients chirurgicaux souhaitent recevoir une information préopératoire complète concernant leur maladie et le traitement planifié. Ils considèrent également comme crucial d'être impliqués dans les prises de décisions thérapeutiques pour le traitement et pour les possibles complications. Le rôle de la famille est limité aux situations ou le patient n'est plus en mesure de participer aux décisions.

Assessing an Adolescent's Capacity for Autonomous Decision-Making in Clinical Care.

The purpose of this article is to provide policy guidance on how to assess the capacity of minor adolescents for autonomous decision-making without a third party authorization, in the field of clinical care. In June 2014, a two-day meeting gathered 20 professionals from all continents, working in the field of adolescent medicine, neurosciences, developmental and clinical psychology, sociology, ethics, and law. Formal presentations and discussions were based on a literature search and the participants' experience. The assessment of adolescent decision-making capacity includes the following: (1) a review of the legal context consistent with the principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child; (2) an empathetic relationship between the adolescent and the health care professional/team; (3) the respect of the adolescent's developmental stage and capacities; (4) the inclusion, if relevant, of relatives, peers, teachers, or social and mental health providers with the adolescent's consent; (5) the control of coercion and other social forces that influence decision-making; and (6) a deliberative stepwise appraisal of the adolescent's decision-making process. This stepwise approach, already used among adults with psychiatric disorders, includes understanding the different facets of the given situation, reasoning on the involved issues, appreciating the outcomes linked with the decision(s), and expressing a choice. Contextual and psychosocial factors play pivotal roles in the assessment of adolescents' decision-making capacity. The evaluation must be guided by a well-established procedure, and health professionals should be trained accordingly. These proposals are the first to have been developed by a multicultural, multidisciplinary expert panel.

Publication trends of shared decision making in 15 high impact medical journals: a full-text review with bibliometric analysis.

BACKGROUND: Shared Decision Making (SDM) is increasingly advocated as a model for medical decision making. However, there is still low use of SDM in clinical practice. High impact factor journals might represent an efficient way for its dissemination. We aimed to identify and characterize publication trends of SDM in 15 high impact medical journals. METHODS: We selected the 15 general and internal medicine journals with the highest impact factor publishing original articles, letters and editorials. We retrieved publications from 1996 to 2011 through the full-text search function on each journal website and abstracted bibliometric data. We included publications of any type containing the phrase "shared decision making" or five other variants in their abstract or full text. These were referred to as SDM publications. A polynomial Poisson regression model with logarithmic link function was used to assess the evolution across the period of the number of SDM publications according to publication characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 1285 SDM publications out of 229,179 publications in 15 journals from 1996 to 2011. The absolute number of SDM publications by journal ranged from 2 to 273 over 16 years. SDM publications increased both in absolute and relative numbers per year, from 46 (0.32% relative to all publications from the 15 journals) in 1996 to 165 (1.17%) in 2011. This growth was exponential (P < 0.01). We found fewer research publications (465, 36.2% of all SDM publications) than non-research publications, which included non-systematic reviews, letters, and editorials. The increase of research publications across time was linear. Full-text search retrieved ten times more SDM publications than a similar PubMed search (1285 vs. 119 respectively). CONCLUSION: This review in full-text showed that SDM publications increased exponentially in major medical journals from 1996 to 2011. This growth might reflect an increased dissemination of the SDM concept to the medical community.

To analyse a trace or not? Evaluating the decision-making process in the criminal investigation

In order to broaden our knowledge and understanding of the decision steps in the criminal investigation process, we started by evaluating the decision to analyse a trace and the factors involved in this decision step. This decision step is embedded in the complete criminal investigation process, involving multiple decision and triaging steps. Considering robbery cases occurring in a geographic region during a 2-year-period, we have studied the factors influencing the decision to submit biological traces, directly sampled on the scene of the robbery or on collected objects, for analysis. The factors were categorised into five knowledge dimensions: strategic, immediate, physical, criminal and utility and decision tree analysis was carried out. Factors in each category played a role in the decision to analyse a biological trace. Interestingly, factors involving information available prior to the analysis are of importance, such as the fact that a positive result (a profile suitable for comparison) is already available in the case, or that a suspect has been identified through traditional police work before analysis. One factor that was taken into account, but was not significant, is the matrix of the trace. Hence, the decision to analyse a trace is not influenced by this variable. The decision to analyse a trace first is very complex and many of the tested variables were taken into account. The decisions are often made on a case-by-case basis.