Association of Actual and Preferred Decision Roles With Patient-Reported Quality of Care: Shared Decision Making in Cancer Care.
نویسندگان
چکیده
IMPORTANCE Shared decision making is associated with improved patient-reported outcomes of cancer treatment, but not all patients prefer to participate in medical decisions. Results from studies of the effect of matching between actual and preferred medical decision roles on patients' perceptions of care quality have been conflicting. OBJECTIVES To determine whether shared decision making was associated with patient ratings of care quality and physician communication and whether patients' preferred decision roles modified those associations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We performed a population- and health system-based survey of participants in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium (CanCORS) study diagnosed with lung and/or colorectal cancer between 2003 and 2005 (56% with colorectal cancer, 40% with non-small-cell lung cancer, and 5% with small-cell lung cancer). The CanCORS study included 9737 patients (cooperation rate among patients contacted, 59.9%) treated in integrated care delivery systems, academic institutions, private offices, and Veterans Affairs hospitals. The medical records were abstracted between October 11, 2005, and April 30, 2009; all analyses were conducted between 2013 and 2014. INTERVENTIONS We surveyed patients specifically about their preferred roles in cancer treatment decisions and their actual roles in decisions about surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. We analyzed the responses of 5315 patients who completed baseline surveys and reported decision roles for a total of 10 817 treatment decisions and assessed associations of patients' decision roles with patient-reported quality of care and physician communication. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The outcomes (identified before data collection) included patient-reported excellent quality of care and top ratings (highest score) on a physician communication scale. RESULTS After adjustment, patients describing physician-controlled (vs shared) decisions were less likely to report excellent quality of care (odds ratio [OR], 0.64; 95% CI, 0.54-0.75; P < .001). Patients' preferred decision roles did not modify this effect (P = .29 for the interaction). Patients describing either actual or preferred physician-controlled (vs shared) roles were less likely to provide a top rating of physician communication (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.45-0.66; P < .001, and OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51-0.87; P = .002, respectively). The preferred role did not modify the effect of the actual role (P = .76 for interaction). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Physician-controlled decisions regarding lung or colorectal cancer treatment were associated with lower ratings of care quality and physician communication. These effects were independent of patients' preferred decision roles, underscoring the importance of seeking to involve all patients in decision making about their treatment.
منابع مشابه
Preferred roles in treatment decision making among patients with cancer: a pooled analysis of studies using the Control Preferences Scale.
OBJECTIVES To collect normative data, assess differences between demographic groups, and indirectly compare US and Canadian medical systems relative to patient expectations of involvement in cancer treatment decision making. STUDY DESIGN Meta-analysis. METHODS Individual patient data were compiled across 6 clinical studies among 3491 patients with cancer who completed the 2-item Control Pre...
متن کاملPreferred and actual participation roles during health care decision making in persons with cancer: a systematic review.
The preferred and actual participation roles during decision making have been studied over the past two decades; however, there is a lack of evidence on the degree of match between patients' preferred and actual participation roles during decision making. A systematic review was carried out to identify published studies that examined preferred and actual participation roles and the match betwee...
متن کاملEvaluating the Level of Ethical Decision Making of Nurses and Its Relationship with the Attitudes of End-Of-Life Care of Patients with COVID-19
Nurses are among the members of the treatment team who have the most contact with Corona Virus Disease- 2019 (COVID-19) patients and their ethical decision-making is inevitable during patient care. On the other hand, nurses' motivation to implement end-of-life care is influenced by their attitude, awareness, and moral reasoning. The aim of this study was to investigate the level of ethical deci...
متن کاملPatient involvement in decision-making: a cross-sectional study in a Malaysian primary care clinic
OBJECTIVE Shared decision-making has been advocated as a useful model for patient management. In developing Asian countries such as Malaysia, there is a common belief that patients prefer a passive role in clinical consultation. As such, the objective of this study was to determine Malaysian patients' role preference in decision-making and the associated factors. DESIGN A cross-sectional stud...
متن کاملDecisions of Value: Going Backstage; Comment on “Contextual Factors Influencing Cost and Quality Decisions in Health and Care: A Structured Evidence Review and Narrative Synthesis”
This commentary expands on two of the key themes briefly raised in the paper involving analysis of the evidence about key contextual influences on decisions of value. The first theme focuses on the need to explore in more detail what is called backstage decision-making looking at how actual decisions are made drawing on evidence from ethnographies about decision-making. These studies point to l...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- JAMA oncology
دوره 1 1 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2015