Understanding and Characterizing Shared Decision-Making and Behavioral Intent in Medical Uncertainty

Applying Theoretical Constructs to Address Medical Uncertainty Situations involving medical reasoning usually include some level of medical uncertainty. Despite the identification of shared decision-making (SDM) as an effective technique, it has been observed that the likelihood of physicians and patients engaging in shared decision making is lower in those situations where it is most needed; specifically in circumstances of medical uncertainty. Having identified shared decision making as an effective, yet often a neglected approach to resolving a lack of information exchange in situations involving medical uncertainty, the next step is to determine the way(s) in which SDM can be integrated and the supplemental processes that may facilitate its integration. SDM involves unique types of communication and relationships between patients and physicians. Therefore, it is necessary to further understand and incorporate human behavioral elements - in particular, behavioral intent - in order to successfully identify and realize the potential benefits of SDM. This paper discusses the background and potential interaction between the theories of shared decision-making, medical uncertainty, and behavioral intent. Identifying Shared Decision-Making Elements in Medical Encounters Dealing with Uncertainty A recent summary of the state of medical knowledge in the U.S. reported that nearly half (47%) of all treatments were of unknown effectiveness, and an additional 7% involved an uncertain tradeoff between benefits and harms. Shared decision-making (SDM) was identified as an effective technique for managing uncertainty when two or more parties were involved. In order to understand which of the elements of SDM are used most frequently and effectively, it is necessary to identify these key elements, and understand how these elements related to each other and the SDM process. The elements identified through the course of the present research were selected from basic principles of the SDM model and the “Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom” (DIKW) Hierarchy. The goal of this ethnographic research was to identify which common elements of shared decision-making patients are most often observed applying in the medical encounter. The results of the present study facilitated the understanding of which elements patients were more likely to exhibit during a primary care medical encounter, as well as determining variables of interest leading to more successful shared decision-making practices between patients and their physicians. Understanding Behavioral Intent to Participate in Shared Decision-Making in Medically Uncertain Situations Objective: This article describes the process undertaken to identify and validate behavioral and normative beliefs and behavioral intent of men between the ages of 45-70 with regard to participating in shared decision-making in medically uncertain situations. This article also discusses the preliminary results of the aforementioned processes and explores potential future uses of this information which may facilitate greater understanding, efficiency and effectiveness of doctor-patient consultations.Design: Qualitative Study using deductive content analysisSetting: Individual semi-structure patient interviews were conducted until data saturation was reached. Researchers read the transcripts and developed a list of codes.Subjects: 25 subjects drawn from the Philadelphia community.Measurements: Qualitative indicators were developed to measure respondents’ experiences and beliefs related to behavioral intent to participate in shared decision-making during medical uncertainty. Subjects were also asked to complete the Krantz Health Opinion Survey as a method of triangulation.Results: Several factors were repeatedly described by respondents as being essential to participate in shared decision-making in medical uncertainty. These factors included past experience with medical uncertainty, an individual’s personality, and the relationship between the patient and his physician.Conclusions: The findings of this study led to the development of a category framework that helped understand an individual’s needs and motivational factors in their intent to participate in shared decision-making. The three main categories include 1) an individual’s representation of medically uncertainty, 2) how the individual copes with medical uncertainty, and 3) the individual’s behavioral intent to seek information and participate in shared decision-making during times of medically uncertain situations.

THE MEASUREMENT OF HUMANISTIC AND DEHUMANISTIC BEHAVIORS IN HOSPITAL NURSING ENVIRONMENTS

The purpose of this investigation was to develop a reliable scale to measure the social environment of hospital nursing units according to the degree of humanistic and dehumanistic behaviors as perceived by nursing staff in hospitals. The study was based on a conceptual model proposed by Jan Howard, a sociologist. After reviewing the literature relevant to personalization of care, analyzing interviews with patients in various settings, and studying biological, psychological, and sociological frames of reference, Howard proposed the following necessary conditions for humanized health care. They were the dimensions of Irreplaceability, Holistic Selves, Freedom of Action, Status Equality, Shared Decision Making and Responsibility, Empathy, and Positive Affect.^ It was proposed that a scale composed of behaviors which reflected Howard's dimensions be developed within the framework of the social environment of nursing care units in hospitals. Nursing units were chosen because hospitals are traditionally organized around nursing care units and because patients spend the majority of their time in hospitals interacting with various levels of nursing personnel.^ Approximately 180 behaviors describing both patient and nursing staff behaviors which occur on nursing units were developed. Behaviors which were believed to be humanistic as well as dehumanistic were included. The items were classified under the dimensions of Howard's model by a purposively selected sample of 42 nurses representing a broad range of education, experience, and clinical areas. Those items with a high degree of agreement, at least 50%, were placed in the questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of 169 items including six items from the Marlowe Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Short Form).^ The questionnaire, the Social Environment Scale, was distributed to the entire 7 to 3 shift nursing staff (603) of four hospitals including a public county specialty hospital, a public county general and acute hospital, a large university affiliated hospital with all services, and a small general community hospital. Staff were asked to report on a Likert type scale how often the listed behaviors occurred on their units. Three hundred and sixteen respondents (52% of the population) participated in the study.^ An item analysis was done in which each item was examined in relationship to its correlation to its own dimension total and to the totals of the other dimensions. As a result of this analysis, three dimensions, Positive Affect, Irreplaceability, and Freedom of Action were deleted from the scale. The final scale consisted of 70 items with 26 in Shared Decision Making and Responsibility, 25 in Holistic Selves, 12 in Status Equality, and seven in Empathy. The alpha coefficient was over .800 for all scales except Empathy which was .597.^ An analysis of variance by hospital was performed on the means of each dimension of the scale. There was a statistically significant difference between hospitals with a trend for the public hospitals to score lower on the scale than the university or community hospitals. That the scale scores should be lower in crowded, understaffed public hospitals was not unexpected and reflected that the scale had some discriminating ability. These differences were still observed after adjusting for the effect of Social Desirability.^ In summary, there is preliminary evidence based on this exploratory investigation that a reliable scale based on at least four dimensions from Howard's model could be developed to measure the concept of humanistic health care in hospital settings. ^