Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, United States of America.
Department of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2019 Jun 10;14(6):e0218249. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218249. eCollection 2019.
OBJECTIVES: While patients' health priorities should inform healthcare, strategies for doing so are lacking for patients with multiple conditions. We describe challenges to, and strategies that support, patients' priorities-aligned decision-making. DESIGN: Participant observation qualitative study. SETTING: Primary care and cardiology practices in Connecticut. PARTICIPANTS: Ten primary care clinicians, five cardiologists, and the Patient Priorities implementation team (four geriatricians, physician expert in clinician training, behavioral medicine expert). The patients discussed were ≥ 66 years with >3 chronic conditions and ≥10 medications or saw ≥ two specialists. EXPOSURE: Following initial training and experience in providing Patient Priorities Care, the clinicians and Patient Priorities implementation team participated in 21 case-based, group discussions (10 face-to-face;11 telephonic). Using emergent learning (i.e. learning which arises from interactions among the participants), participants discussed challenges, posed solutions, and worked together to determine how to align care options with the health priorities of 35 patients participating in the Patient Priorities Care pilot. MAIN OUTCOMES: Challenges to, and strategies for, aligning decision-making with patient's health priorities. RESULTS: Categories of challenges discussed among participants included uncertainty, complexity, and multiplicity of problems and treatments; difficulty switching to patients' priorities as the focus of decision-making; and differing perspectives between patients and clinicians, and among clinicians. Strategies identified to support patient priorities-aligned decision-making included starting with one thing that matters most to each patient; conducting serial trials of starting, stopping, or continuing interventions; focusing on function (i.e. achieving patient's desired activities) rather than eliminating symptoms; basing communications, decision-making, and effectiveness on patients' priorities not solely on diseases; and negotiating shared decisions when there are differences in perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: The discrete set of challenges encountered and the implementable strategies identified suggest that patient priorities-aligned decision-making in the care of patients with multiple chronic conditions is feasible, albeit complicated. Findings require replication in additional settings and determination of their effect on patient outcomes.
目的:尽管患者的健康优先事项应告知医疗保健,但对于患有多种疾病的患者,缺乏相关策略。我们描述了支持患者优先事项一致的决策制定所面临的挑战和策略。
设计:参与者观察定性研究。
设置:康涅狄格州的初级保健和心脏病学诊所。
参与者:10 名初级保健临床医生、5 名心脏病专家和患者优先事项实施团队(4 名老年病专家、临床医生培训专家、行为医学专家)。讨论的患者年龄均≥66 岁,患有>3 种慢性疾病和≥10 种药物,或至少看了 2 名专科医生。
暴露情况:在提供患者优先事项护理的初步培训和经验后,临床医生和患者优先事项实施团队参加了 21 次基于案例的小组讨论(10 次面对面;11 次电话)。参与者利用新兴学习(即参与者之间的互动所产生的学习)讨论了挑战,提出了解决方案,并共同努力确定如何将护理选择与参与患者优先事项护理试点的 35 名患者的健康优先事项保持一致。
主要结果:与患者健康优先事项保持一致的决策制定所面临的挑战和策略。
结果:参与者讨论的挑战类别包括不确定性、复杂性和治疗方法的多样性;难以将决策重点转向患者的优先事项;以及患者和临床医生之间以及临床医生之间存在不同观点。为支持患者优先事项一致的决策制定而确定的策略包括从每个患者最重要的一件事开始;进行一系列开始、停止或继续干预的试验;关注功能(即实现患者期望的活动)而不仅仅是消除症状;将沟通、决策和效果建立在患者的优先事项上,而不仅仅是疾病上;在存在观点差异时进行共同决策。
结论:遇到的一系列具体挑战和可实施的策略表明,在治疗患有多种慢性疾病的患者时,基于患者优先事项的决策是可行的,尽管复杂。研究结果需要在其他环境中复制,并确定其对患者结局的影响。
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018-10-3
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018-10-3
JAMA Netw Open. 2024-10-1
Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl. 2024-1-18
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2024-5
Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2019-1-16
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2018-11
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018-10-3
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018-10-3
J Oncol Pract. 2017-10
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2016-3
JAMA Intern Med. 2015-7