scholarly journals Should We Use the IMPACT-Model for the Outcome Prognostication of TBI Patients? A Qualitative Study Assessing Physicians’ Perceptions

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 238146831875798 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesse Moskowitz ◽  
Thomas Quinn ◽  
Muhammad W. Khan ◽  
Lori Shutter ◽  
Robert Goldberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Neurocritical Care ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Impact Model ◽  
Prognostic Information ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Impact

Introduction. Shared Decision-Making may facilitate information exchange, deliberation, and effective decision-making, but no decision aids currently exist for difficult decisions in neurocritical care patients. The International Patient Decision Aid Standards, a framework for the creation of high-quality decision aids (DA), recommends the presentation of numeric outcome and risk estimates. Efforts are underway to create a goals-of-care DA in critically-ill traumatic brain injury (ciTBI) patients. To inform its content, we examined physicians’ perceptions, and use of the IMPACT-model, the most widely validated ciTBI outcome model, and explored physicians’ preferences for communicating prognostic information towards families. Methods. We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews in 20 attending physicians (neurosurgery,neurocritical care,trauma,palliative care) at 7 U.S. academic medical centers. We used performed qualitative content analysis of transcribed interviews to identify major themes. Results. Only 12 physicians (60%) expressed awareness of the IMPACT-model; two stated that they “barely” knew the model. Seven physicians indicated using the model at least some of the time in clinical practice, although none used it exclusively to derive a patient’s prognosis. Four major themes emerged: the IMPACT-model is intended for research but should not be applied to individual patients; mistrust in the IMPACT-model derivation data; the IMPACT-model is helpful in reducing prognostic variability among physicians; concern that statistical models may mislead families about a patient’s prognosis. Discussion: Our study identified significant variability of the awareness, perception, and use of the IMPACT-model among physicians. While many physicians prefer to avoid conveying numeric prognostic estimates with families using the IMPACT-model, several physicians thought that they “ground” them and reduce prognostic variability among physicians. These findings may factor into the creation and implementation of future ciTBI-related DAs.

scholarly journals Exploring the role of the Care and Health Information Exchange (CHIE) in clinical decision-making: a realist evaluation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Scott ◽  
Elisavet Andrikopoulou ◽  
Haythem Nakkas ◽  
Paul Roderick
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Health Information Exchange ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
The Impact

Background: The overall evidence for the impact of electronic information systems on cost, quality and safety of healthcare remains contested. Whilst it seems intuitively obvious that having more data about a patient will improve care, the mechanisms by which information availability is translated into better decision-making are not well understood. Furthermore, there is the risk of data overload creating a negative outcome. There are situations where a key information summary can be more useful than a rich record. The Care and Health Information Exchange (CHIE) is a shared electronic health record for Hampshire and the Isle of Wight that combines key information from hospital, general practice, community care and social services. Its purpose is to provide clinical and care professionals with complete, accurate and up-to-date information when caring for patients. CHIE is used by GP out-of-hours services, acute hospital doctors, ambulance service, GPs and others in caring for patients. Research questions: The fundamental question was How does awareness of CHIE or usage of CHIE affect clinical decision-making? The secondary questions were What are the latent benefits of CHIE in frontline NHS operations? and What is the potential of CHIE to have an impact on major NHS cost pressures? The NHS funders decided to focus on acute medical inpatient admissions as the initial scope, given the high costs associated with hospital stays and the patient complexities (and therefore information requirements) often associated with unscheduled admissions. Methods: Semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals to explore their experience about the utility of CHIE in their clinical scenario, whether and how it has affected their decision-making practices and the barriers and facilitators for their use of CHIE. The Framework Method was used for qualitative analysis, supported by the software tool Atlas.ti. Results: 21 healthcare professionals were interviewed. Three main functions were identified as useful: extensive medication prescribing history, information sharing between primary, secondary and social care and access to laboratory test results. We inferred two positive cognitive mechanisms: knowledge confidence and collaboration assurance, and three negative ones: consent anxiety, search anxiety and data mistrust. Conclusions: CHIE gives clinicians the bigger picture to understand the patient's health and social care history and circumstances so as to make confident and informed decisions. CHIE is very beneficial for medicines reconciliation on admission, especially for patients that are unable to speak or act for themselves or who cannot remember their precise medication or allergies. We found no clear evidence that CHIE has a significant impact on admission or discharge decisions. We propose the use of recommender systems to help clinicians navigate such large volumes of patient data, which will only grow as additional data is collected.

scholarly journals Experts' views on the implementation of the prenatal screening decision aid in Iran: A qualitative study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Razieh Zahedi ◽  
Leila Nemati-Anaraki ◽  
Shahram Sedghi ◽  
Mamak Shariat
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Prenatal Screening ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Personal Factors ◽  
Snowball Sampling ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Patient Decision Aids ◽  
Patient Decision

Background & Aim: Patient decision aids are detailed and personalized health education materials that assist patients in decision making. According to expert viewpoints, this study aimed to determine important factors in implementing the prenatal screening decision aid in Iran. Methods & Materials: In this qualitative study, 24 experts, including seven obstetricians, four information scientists, five managers or policymakers, and eight midwives, were selected using purposive and snowball sampling approaches. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to collect the data between January 2020 and June 2020 in Tehran, Iran. A prenatal screening decision aid was presented to the participants, and we asked them to raise their concerns and thoughts regarding the factors influencing the implementation of patient decision aids. We used MAXQDA 10 and applied conventional content analysis for data analysis. Results: Two organizational and personal factors themes were identified to implement Iran's prenatal screening decision aids. Conclusion: We identified the viewpoints of experts regarding major factors in patient decision aids implementation for prenatal screening. Before implementing prenatal screening decision aids in Iran, it would be helpful to consider these organizational and personal factors. Prenatal screening decision aids can provide better information for pregnant women and strengthen their decision-making ability.

Abstract 27: Patients' Perspectives on a Decision Aid to Facilitate Cost-sensitive Decisions for Sacubitril-Valsartan

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea R Mitchell ◽  
Grace Venechuk ◽  
Larry A Allen ◽  
Dan D Matlock ◽  
Miranda Moore ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Cost Information ◽  
Reduced Ejection Fraction ◽  
The Impact

Background: Decision aids frequently focus on decisions that are preference-sensitive due to an absence of superior medical option or qualitative differences in treatments. Out of pocket cost can also make decisions preference-sensitive. However, cost is infrequently discussed with patients, and cost has not typically been considered in developing approaches to shared decision-making or decision aids. Determining a therapy’s value to a patient requires an individualized assessment of both benefits and cost. A decision aid addressing cost for sacubitril-valsartan in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) was developed because this medication has clear medical benefits but can entail appreciable out-of-pocket cost. Objective: To explore patients’ perspectives on a decision aid for sacubitril-valsartan in HFrEF. Methods: Twenty adults, ages 32-73, with HFrEF who met general eligibility for sacubitril-valsartan were recruited from outpatient HF clinics and inpatient services at 2 geographically-distinct academic health systems. In-depth interviews were conducted by trained interviewers using a semi-structured guide after patients reviewed the decision aid. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed; qualitative descriptive analysis was conducted using a template analytic method. Results: Participants confirmed that cost was relevant to this decision and that cost discussions with clinicians are infrequent but welcomed. Participants cited multiple ways that this decision aid could be helpful beyond informing a choice; these included serving as a conversation starter, helping inform questions, and serving as a reference later. The decision aid seemed balanced; several participants felt that it was promotional, while others wanted a more “positive” presentation. Participants valued the display of benefits of sacubitril-valsartan but had variable views about how to apply data to themselves and heterogenous interpretations of a 3% absolute reduction in mortality over 2 years. None felt this benefit was overwhelming; about half felt it was very small. The decision aid incorporated a novel “gist statement” to contextualize benefits and counter tendencies to dismiss this mortality reduction as trivial. Several participants liked this statement; few had strong impressions. Conclusion: Out of pocket cost should be part of shared decision-making. These data suggest patients are receptive to inclusion of cost in decision aids and that a “middle ground” between being promotional and negative may exist. The data, however, raise concerns regarding potential dismissal of clinically meaningful benefits and illustrate challenges identifying appropriate contextualizing language. The impact of various framings warrants further study, as does integration of decision aids with patient-specific out-of-pocket cost information during clinical encounters.

scholarly journals Understanding Relationship between Milestone and Decision-Making in Project Management: A Qualitative Study among Project Managers in Saudi Arabia

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. 184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Umar Altahtooh ◽  
Thamir Alaskar
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Project Management ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Project Managers ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Pragmatic Research ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

Despite the importance of milestone as a key knowledge in project management, there has been lack of research to understand the relationship between milestones and decision-making. This paper presents a pragmatic research context that aims understanding the nature of milestones and their relationship with different decision-making structures and responsibilities across projects. Data were collected through 14 semi-structured interviews with project managers and analyzed using thematic analysis. The findings explore the concepts of project milestones among project managers in Saudi Arabia. The paper finds that there is a relationship between milestones and the impact on decision-making.

Stressed decision makers and use of decision aids: a literature review and conceptual model

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 710-754 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica Adya ◽  
Gloria Phillips-Wren
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Conceptual Model ◽  
Perceived Stress ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Decision Quality ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Managerial Decision ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Impact

Purpose Decision making is inherently stressful since the decision maker must choose between potentially conflicting alternatives with unique hazards and uncertain outcomes. Whereas decision aids such as decision support systems (DSS) can be beneficial in stressful scenarios, decision makers sometimes misuse them during decision making, leading to suboptimal outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between stress, decision making and decision aid use. Design/methodology/approach The authors conduct an extensive multi-disciplinary review of decision making and DSS use through the lens of stress and examine how stress, as perceived by decision makers, impacts their use or misuse of DSS even when such aids can improve decision quality. Research questions examine underlying sources of stress in managerial decision making that influence decision quality, relationships between a decision maker’s perception of stress, DSS use/misuse, and decision quality, and implications for research and practice on DSS design and capabilities. Findings The study presents a conceptual model that provides an integrative behavioral view of the impact of a decision maker’s perceived stress on their use of a DSS and the quality of their decisions. The authors identify critical knowledge gaps and propose a research agenda to improve decision quality and use of DSS by considering a decision maker’s perceived stress. Originality/value This study provides a previously unexplored view of DSS use and misuse as shaped by the decision and job stress experienced by decision makers. Through the application of four theories, the review and its findings highlight key design principles that can mitigate the negative effects of stressors on DSS use.

scholarly journals How to decide adequately? Qualitative study of GPs’ view on decision-making in self-referred and physician-referred emergency department consultations in Berlin, Germany

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. e026786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Oslislo ◽  
Christoph Heintze ◽  
Martina Schmiedhofer ◽  
Martin Möckel ◽  
Liane Schenk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Wide Spectrum ◽  
Influencing Factor ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Ambulatory Setting ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Registration Number

ObjectivesPatients with acute symptoms present not only to general practitioners (GPs), but also frequently to emergency departments (EDs). Patients’ decision processes leading up to an ED self-referral are complex and supposed to result from a multitude of determinants. While they are key providers in primary care, little is known about GPs’ perception of such patients. This qualitative study explores the GPs’ view regarding motives and competences of patients self-referring to EDs, and also GPs’ rationale for or against physician-initiated ED referrals.DesignQualitative study with semi-structured, face-to-face interviews; qualitative content analysis.SettingGP practices in Berlin, Germany.Participants15 GPs (female/male: 9/6; mean age 53.6 years).ResultsThe interviewed GPs related a wide spectrum of factors potentially influencing their patients’ decision to visit an ED, and also their own decision-making in potential referrals. Considerations go beyond medical urgency. Statements concerning patients’ surmised rationale corresponded to GPs’ reasoning in a variety of important areas. For one thing, the timely availability of an extended spectrum of diagnostic and therapeutic options may make ED services attractive to both. Access difficulties in the ambulatory setting were mentioned as additional triggers for an ED visit initiated by a patient or a GP. Key patient factors like severity of symptoms and anxiety also play a major role; a desire for reassurance may lead to both self-referred and physician-initiated ED visits. Patients’ health competence was prevailingly depicted as limited, with the internet as an important influencing factor. Counselling efforts by GP were described as crucial for improving health literacy.ConclusionsHealth education could hold promise when aiming to reduce non-urgent ED consultations. Primary care providers are in a key position here. Amelioration of organisational shortages in ambulatory care, for example, limited consultation hours, might also make an important impact, as these trigger both self-referrals and GP-initiated ED referrals.Trial registration numberDRKS00011930.

scholarly journals Parenting while living with advanced cancer: A qualitative study

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 231-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliza M Park ◽  
Devon K Check ◽  
Mi-Kyung Song ◽  
Katherine E Reeder-Hayes ◽  
Laura C Hanson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Functional Status ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Parental Concerns ◽  
The Impact

Background: Patients with advanced cancer who have dependent children are an important population with a life-limiting illness and high levels of psychological distress. Few studies have addressed the experience of being a parent with advanced cancer and their potential palliative needs. Aim: To describe the experience of living with advanced cancer as a parent, including illness experience, parental concerns, and treatment decision making and to explore whether these experiences differ by their functional status. Design: We conducted a cross-sectional, qualitative study using in-depth, semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed using thematic content analysis. Setting and participants: A total of 42 participants with metastatic cancer and with at least one child under the age of 18 years were recruited from a comprehensive cancer center. 25 participants were rated as having high functional status (the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status Scale = 0–1) and 17 with low functional status (ECOG=2–4). Results: We identified four themes regarding the experience of being a parent with advanced cancer: (1) parental concerns about the impact of their illness and death on their children, (2) “missing out” and losses of parental role and responsibilities, (3) maintaining parental responsibilities despite life-limiting illness, and (4) parental identity influencing decision making about treatment. Parental functional status influenced not only physical responsibilities but also intensified parenting psychological concerns. Conclusion: Parents with metastatic cancer may have unique palliative care needs as they experience parenting concerns while managing the psychological and physical demands of advanced cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document