Nivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), PO Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Research Department, Breuer & Intraval, Research and Consultancy, Groningen, The Netherlands.
BMC Med Educ. 2022 Aug 11;22(1):613. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03685-0.
The non-curative setting makes communication and shared decision-making in palliative care extremely demanding. This is even more so for patients with limited health literacy. So far, research in palliative care focusing on shared decision-making with patients with limited health literacy is lacking. Recent research from our team indicates that the assessment of these patients' understanding of their situation and the implementation of shared decision-making in palliative care, needs improvement.
To improve communication and decision-making, especially with patients with limited health literacy, we developed and evaluated a blended training programme for healthcare providers. The training programme comprised of an e-learning and a team training. The evaluation was performed by 1. conducting interviews (n = 15) focused on evaluating the whole programme and, 2. coding video-recorded outpatient consultations on the extent to which providers involved patients in decision-making before (n = 19) and after (n = 20) the intervention, using the 5-item OPTION coding instrument.
The interviews showed that healthcare providers valued the skills they had learned during the e-learning and team training. Providers specifically valued the teach-back technique, learned to use simpler wording and felt better able to recognize patients with limited health literacy. Many providers reported a change in communication behaviour as a consequence of the training programme. Suggestions for improvement for both e-learning and training were, amongst others, a follow-up team training course and a new scenarios for the e-learning about discussing palliative care. For both the pre- and the post-measurement, involving patients in decision-making lies between a minimal and a moderate effort; differences were not significant.
The e-learning and team training were valued positively by the healthcare providers. Adaptations to the e-learning have been made after evaluation. The e-learning has been implemented in several hospitals and medical education. To improve shared decision-making in practice a more sustained effort is needed.
在姑息治疗的非治愈环境中,沟通和共同决策极具挑战性。对于健康素养有限的患者来说更是如此。迄今为止,姑息治疗中针对健康素养有限的患者进行共同决策的研究还很缺乏。我们团队最近的研究表明,需要改进对这些患者对自身状况的理解的评估,以及姑息治疗中共同决策的实施。
为了改善沟通和决策,特别是针对健康素养有限的患者,我们开发并评估了一种针对医疗保健提供者的混合培训计划。培训计划包括在线学习和团队培训。通过 1. 进行访谈(n=15)重点评估整个方案,以及 2. 使用 OPTION 编码工具对提供者在干预前后(n=19 和 n=20)参与患者决策的程度进行视频记录的门诊咨询进行编码,对培训进行了评估。
访谈表明,医疗保健提供者重视他们在在线学习和团队培训中学到的技能。提供者特别重视回授技巧,学会使用更简单的措辞,并且更能识别出健康素养有限的患者。许多提供者报告说,由于培训计划,他们的沟通行为发生了变化。在线学习和培训的改进建议包括后续的团队培训课程以及关于姑息治疗讨论的新场景。对于预测量和后测量,患者参与决策的程度介于最小努力和中等努力之间;差异不显著。
医疗保健提供者对在线学习和团队培训给予了积极评价。在评估后对在线学习进行了调整。在线学习已在多家医院和医学教育中实施。为了在实践中改善共同决策,需要付出更多的努力。