...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical rehabilitation >Shared decision-making within goal-setting in rehabilitation: a mixed-methods study
【24h】

Shared decision-making within goal-setting in rehabilitation: a mixed-methods study

机译:在康复的目标环境中共享决策:混合方法研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives: To assess the extent of shared decision-making within goal-setting meetings and explore patient-reported factors that influenced their participation to shared decision-making about their goals. Design: A two-phase explanatory sequential mixed-methods study, using questionnaires and interviews. Setting: A rehabilitation centre and patients’ homes. Subjects: Frail elderly patients. Main Measures: Quantitative data were collected after every patient’s goal-setting meeting using the Multifocal Approach to Sharing in Shared Decision Making (MAPPIN’SDM) questionnaire that assesses competencies relevant to shared decision-making. Shared decision-making was rated by an observer, patients and staff and compared. Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews. Results: A total of 24 rehabilitation team members and 40 patients (mean age: 83?years) participated. All study participants felt that competency 7a (the language used by staff made sense to the patient) was observed in all meetings. Patients reported that for 22 of the meetings competency 4a, the advantages and disadvantages of rehabilitation, was not discussed. Games-Howell tests for direction of differences between groups showed significant difference ( P = 0.001) between patients and staff in whether patients’ problems were discussed. Nine patients’ interviews suggested that motivation, self-confidence, family support, preparing themselves, getting information about goal-setting and rehabilitation options could enable them to participate in shared decision-making. They suggested that staff should communicate clearly and demonstrate that they are listening to patients but without a paternalistic approach. Conclusion: Staff exhibited most shared decision-making competencies at a good level. However, patients highlighted problems with information sharing and felt staff might not be listening to them. Research and practice should explore tools to address these shortfalls.
机译:目标:评估目标设定会议内共享决策的程度,并探讨患者报告的因素,这些因素影响了他们参与其参与的对其目标的共同决策。设计:使用问卷和访谈的两相解释性序贯混合方法研究。环境:康复中心和患者的家园。主题:勒布老年患者。主要措施:在每次患者的目标设定会议上使用多焦点方法分享共享决策(MAPPIN'SDM)问卷调查问卷后,收集定量数据,评估与共同决策相关的能力。观察者,患者和员工的共同决策评估并进行比较。通过半结构化访谈收集定性数据。结果:共24名康复团队成员和40名患者(意思是年龄:83?年)参加。所有研究参与者都认为,在所有会议中都观察到胜能7A(员工使用的语言是对患者的意义)。患者报告说,对于22次会议能力4A,康复的优势和缺点并未讨论。 Games-Howell对患者和工作人员之间的差异方向进行了显着差异(p = 0.001),在患者是否讨论过患者的问题。九名患者的采访表明,动机,自信,家庭支持,准备自己,获取有关目标和康复期权的信息,可以使他们参与共享决策。他们建议员工应该清楚地沟通,并证明他们正在听患者,但没有家长式的方法。结论:工作人员在良好的水平上展出了最多的共同决策能力。但是,患者强调了信息共享的问题,并且毛毡员工可能无法倾听它们。研究和实践应该探索解决这些不足的工具。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号