DeMeester Rachel H, Lopez Fanny Y, Moore Jennifer E, Cook Scott C, Chin Marshall H
Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, MC 2007, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA.
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Reducing Health Care Disparities Through Payment and Delivery System Reform Program Office, University of Chicago, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, MC 2007, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2016 Jun;31(6):651-62. doi: 10.1007/s11606-016-3608-3.
Shared decision making (SDM) occurs when patients and clinicians work together to reach care decisions that are both medically sound and responsive to patients' preferences and values. SDM is an important tenet of patient-centered care that can improve patient outcomes. Patients with multiple minority identities, such as sexual orientation and race/ethnicity, are at particular risk for poor SDM. Among these dual-minority patients, added challenges to clear and open communication include cultural barriers, distrust, and a health care provider's lack of awareness of the patient's minority sexual orientation or gender identity. However, organizational factors like a culture of inclusion and private space throughout the visit can improve SDM with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender ("LGBT") racial/ethnic minority patients who have faced stigma and discrimination. Most models of shared decision making focus on the patient-provider interaction, but the health care organization's context is also critical. Context-an organization's structure and operations-can strongly influence the ability and willingness of patients and clinicians to engage in shared decision making. SDM is most likely to be optimal if organizations transform their contexts and patients and providers improve their communication. Thus, we propose a conceptual model that suggests ways in which organizations can shape their contextual structure and operations to support SDM. The model contains six drivers: workflows, health information technology, organizational structure and culture, resources and clinic environment, training and education, and incentives and disincentives. These drivers work through four mechanisms to impact care: continuity and coordination, the ease of SDM, knowledge and skills, and attitudes and beliefs. These mechanisms can activate clinicians and patients to engage in high-quality SDM. We provide examples of how specific contextual changes could make SDM more effective for LGBT racial/ethnic minority populations, focusing especially on transformations that would establish a safe environment, build trust, and decrease stigma.
当患者和临床医生共同努力做出既符合医学原则又能回应患者偏好和价值观的护理决策时,就会出现共同决策(SDM)。共同决策是以人为本护理的一项重要原则,可改善患者的治疗效果。具有多种少数群体身份(如性取向和种族/族裔)的患者在共同决策方面尤其容易出现不佳情况。在这些双重少数群体患者中,清晰和开放沟通面临的额外挑战包括文化障碍、不信任以及医疗服务提供者对患者少数性取向或性别认同缺乏认知。然而,诸如包容文化和就诊全程的私密空间等组织因素,可以改善与面临污名化和歧视的女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋和跨性别(“LGBT”)种族/族裔少数群体患者的共同决策。大多数共同决策模型都侧重于患者与提供者之间的互动,但医疗保健组织的背景也至关重要。背景——一个组织的结构和运营——会强烈影响患者和临床医生参与共同决策的能力和意愿。如果组织改变其背景,患者和提供者改善沟通,共同决策最有可能达到最佳效果。因此,我们提出了一个概念模型,该模型提出了组织可以塑造其背景结构和运营以支持共同决策的方法。该模型包含六个驱动因素:工作流程、健康信息技术、组织结构和文化、资源与诊所环境、培训与教育以及激励与抑制因素。这些驱动因素通过四种机制影响护理:连续性与协调性、共同决策的难易程度、知识与技能以及态度与信念。这些机制可以促使临床医生和患者参与高质量的共同决策。我们提供了具体背景变化如何使共同决策对LGBT种族/族裔少数群体更有效的示例,尤其关注能够营造安全环境、建立信任并减少污名化的变革。