Medical decision making: perspectives of patients and physicians

Magdeburg, Univ., Fak. für Wirtschaftswiss., Diss., 2013

Clinical and laboratory predictors of imported malaria in an outpatient setting: an aid to medical decision making in returning travellers with fever

Si le tableau clinique évoque une malaria et que le résultat des examens parasitologiques n?est pas disponible ou est négatif, le praticien n?a pas d?information basée sur l?évidence pour savoir s?il doit donner ou non un traitement présomptif. Afin d?identifier les facteurs cliniques et paracliniques prédictifs d?une parasitémie à Plasmodium, nous avons mené une étude prospective chez les voyageurs ou migrants en provenance d?une zone tropicale ou subtropicale et qui consultaient pour de la fièvre. Le questionnaire comprenait 49 items explorant les données démographiques, les caractéristiques du voyage, les éléments de l?anamnèse et de l?examen clinique ainsi que les résultats de laboratoire. 336 sujets avec données complètes ont été recrutés (97 patients atteints de malaria et 239 contrôles avec fièvre et examen parasitologique négatif). L?analyse de régression multivariée a permis d?identifier les facteurs prédictifs de maiaria suivants : prophylaxie inadéquate, sudations, absence de douleur abdominale, température )38"C, mauvais état général, splénomégalie, compte leucocytaire (1 O x 1 03/L, plaquettes ~ 1 5 0 x l 03/L, taux d?hémoglobine <12 g/dL et éosinophiles (5%. La présence d?une splénomégalie avait le coefficient de probabilité positif pour un diagnostic de malaria le plus élevé (1 3.6) ; venait ensuite la présence d?une thrombopénie (1 1 .O). Dans le contexte de la consultation ambulatoire de la Policlinique Médicale Universitaire (prévalence de malaria de 29%), la probabilité post- test d?avoir un examen parasitologique positif était de 85% pour la splénomégalie et de 82% pour la thrombopénie. Même si le seuil thérapeutique n?est pas absolument défini, il semble raisonnable d?envisager un traitement présomptif lorsque la probabilité post- test est >80%. Si le médecin est réticent à administrer un traitement sans documentation parasitologique, il devrait au moins se retenir d?entreprendre d?autres investigations coûteuses, et plutôt répéter l?examen parasitologique après 12-24 heures.

A study to determine the association between medical decision-making and the performance of an institutional ethics committee

This study developed proxy measures to test the independent effects of medical specialty, institutional ethics committee (IEC) and the interaction between the two, upon a proxy for the dependent variable of the medical decision to withhold/withdraw care for the dying--the resuscitation index (R-index). Five clinical vignettes were constructed and validated to convey the realism and contextual factors implicit in the decision to withhold/withdraw care. A scale was developed to determine the range of contact by an IEC in terms of physician knowledge and use of IEC policy.^ This study was composed of a sample of 215 physicians in a teaching hospital in the Southwest where proxy measures were tested for two competing influences, medical specialty and IEC, which alternately oppose and support the decision to withhold/withdraw care for the dying. A sub-sample of surgeons supported the hypothesis that an IEC is influential in opposing the medical training imperative to prolong life.^ Those surgeons with a low IEC score were 326 percent more likely to continue care than were surgeons with a high IEC score when compared to all other specialties. IEC alone was also found to significantly predict the decision to withhold/withdraw care. Interaction of IEC with the specialty of surgery was found to be the best predictor for a decision to withhold/withdraw care for the dying. ^

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.

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.

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

Objective: The relationship between physicians and patients has undergone¦important changes, and the current emancipation of patients has led to¦a real partnership in medical decision-making. This study aimed to assess¦patients' preferences on different aspects of decision-making during treatment¦and potential complications, as well as the amount and type of preoperative¦information before visceral surgery.¦Methods: Prospective non-randomized study based on a questionnaire given¦to 253 consecutive patients scheduled for elective GI surgery.¦Results: Concerning surgical complications or treatment in the intensive care¦unit, 64% of patients wished to take actively part in any medical decisions.¦The respective figures for cardiac resuscitation and treatment limitations were¦89% and 60%. About information, 73%, 77% and 47% of patients wish¦detailed information, information on a potential ICUhospitalization and cardiac¦resuscitation, respectively. Elderly and low-educated patients were significantly¦less interested in shared medical decision-making (p = 0·003 and 0·015) and in¦information receiving (p = 0·03 and 0·05). Similarly, involvement of the family¦in decision-making was significantly less important in elderly and male patients¦(p = 0·05 and 0·03 respectively). Neither the type of operation (minor or major)¦nor the severity of disease (malignancies vs. non-malignancies) was a significant¦factor for shared decision-making, information or family involvement.¦Conclusion: The vast majority of surgical patients clearly want to get adequate¦preoperative information about their disease and the planned treatment. They¦also consider it as crucial to be involved in any kind of decision-making for¦treatment and complications. The family's role is limited to support the treating¦physicians if the patient is unable to participate in taking decisions.

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

BACKGROUND: The relationship between physicians and patients has undergone important changes, and the current emancipation of patients has led to a real partnership in medical decision making. The present study aimed to assess patients' preferences on different aspects of decision making during treatment and potential complications, as well as the amount and type of preoperative information wanted before visceral surgery. METHODS: This was a prospective non-randomized study based on a questionnaire given to 253 consecutive patients scheduled for elective gastrointestinal surgery. RESULTS: In considering surgical complications or treatment in the intensive care unit, 64 % of patients wished to take an active role in any medical decisions. The respective figures for cardiac resuscitation and treatment limitations were 89 and 60 %. As for information, 73, 77, and 47 % of patients wish detailed information, information on a potential ICU hospitalization, and knowledge of cardiac resuscitation, respectively. Elderly and low-educated patients were significantly less interested in shared medical decision making (p = 0.003 and 0.015), and in receiving information (p = 0.03 and 0.05). Similarly, involvement of the family in decision making was significantly less important to elderly and male patients (p = 0.05 and 0.03, respectively). Neither the type of operation (minor or major) nor the severity of disease (malignancies versus non-malignancies) was a significant factor for shared decision making, information, or family involvement. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of surgical patients clearly want to get adequate preoperative information about their disease and the planned treatment. They also consider it crucial to be involved in any kind of decision making for treatment and complications. For most patients, the family role is limited to supporting the treating physicians if the patient is unable to participate in decision making.

Design and implementation of a multicriteria medical decision support system for diagnosis and treatment

Health care providers face the problem of trying to make decisions with inadequate information and also with an overload of (often contradictory) information. Physicians often choose treatment long before they know which disease is present. Indeed, uncertainty is intrinsic to the practice of medicine. Decision analysis can help physicians structure and work through a medical decision problem, and can provide reassurance that decisions are rational and consistent with the beliefs and preferences of other physicians and patients. ^ The primary purpose of this research project is to develop the theory, methods, techniques and tools necessary for designing and implementing a system to support solving medical decision problems. A case study involving “abdominal pain” serves as a prototype for implementing the system. The research, however, focuses on a generic class of problems and aims at covering theoretical as well as practical aspects of the system developed. ^ The main contributions of this research are: (1) bridging the gap between the statistical approach and the knowledge-based (expert) approach to medical decision making; (2) linking a collection of methods, techniques and tools together to allow for the design of a medical decision support system, based on a framework that involves the Analytic Network Process (ANP), the generalization of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to dependence and feedback, for problems involving diagnosis and treatment; (3) enhancing the representation and manipulation of uncertainty in the ANP framework by incorporating group consensus weights; and (4) developing a computer program to assist in the implementation of the system. ^

How family caregivers' medical and moral assumptions influence decision making for patients in the vegetative state: a qualitative interview study.

Background Decisions on limiting life-sustaining treatment for patients in the vegetative state (VS) are emotionally and morally challenging. In Germany, doctors have to discuss, together with the legal surrogate (often a family member), whether the proposed treatment is in accordance with the patient's will. However, it is unknown whether family members of the patient in the VS actually base their decisions on the patient's wishes. Objective To examine the role of advance directives, orally expressed wishes, or the presumed will of patients in a VS for family caregivers' decisions on life-sustaining treatment. Methods and sample A qualitative interview study with 14 next of kin of patients in a VS in a long-term care setting was conducted; 13 participants were the patient's legal surrogates. Interviews were analysed according to qualitative content analysis. Results The majority of family caregivers said that they were aware of aforementioned wishes of the patient that could be applied to the VS condition, but did not base their decisions primarily on these wishes. They gave three reasons for this: (a) the expectation of clinical improvement, (b) the caregivers' definition of life-sustaining treatments and (c) the moral obligation not to harm the patient. If the patient's wishes were not known or not revealed, the caregivers interpreted a will to live into the patient's survival and non-verbal behaviour. Conclusions Whether or not prior treatment wishes of patients in a VS are respected depends on their applicability, and also on the medical assumptions and moral attitudes of the surrogates. We recommend repeated communication, support for the caregivers and advance care planning.

Medical students' knowledge about end-of-life decision-making

The influence of medical students' knowledge concerning end-of-life care, considering ethical theories and clinical practice, remains controversial. We aimed to investigate medical students' knowledge of bioethical concepts related to moral kinds of death (euthanasia, disthanasia, and orthothanasia) and to analyze the influence of their clinical experience on practicing such approaches in a tertiary hospital in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. We interviewed 180 medical students [distributed in Group 1 (G1) - first to third- year students, and Group 2 (G2) - fourth to sixth-year students] to evaluate the influence of the course on "medical ethics" on ethical theories and clinical practice, using a closed questionnaire. The course on "medical ethics" did not distinguish the groups (P=0.704) in relation to bioethical concepts. Neologisms such as "cacothanasia" and "idiothanasia" were incorrectly viewed as bioethical concepts by 28% of the interviewees. Moreover, 45.3% of the sample considered health care professionals incapable of managing terminally ill patients, especially G2 (29%) as compared to G1 (16.5%, P=0.031). The concept of euthanasia was accepted by 41% of sample, as compared to 98.2% for orthothanasia. Among medical students that accepted ways to abbreviate life (22.9%), 30.1% belonged to G1, and only 16.1% to G2 (P=0.049). These medical students were unfamiliar with common bioethical concepts. Moreover, they considered healthcare professionals incapable of managing terminally ill patients. The ethical ideal of the "good death" reflects better acceptance of orthothanasia by medical students, suggesting a tendency to apply it in their future clinical practice.

Measurement of Advance Directive and Medical Treatment Decision-Making Capacity of Older Adults

The objective of this study was to characterize two components of decisional competence that are relevant to advance directive (AD) completion and medical treatment decision making among a subsample of older adults hospitalized in acute care settings.

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.