School of Health Sciences, Centre for Psychosocial Research in Cancer (CentRIC), University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Health Expect. 2024 Feb;27(1):e13844. doi: 10.1111/hex.13844. Epub 2023 Sep 13.
Patient decision aids (PtDA) complement shared decision-making with healthcare professionals and improve decision quality. However, PtDA often lack theoretical underpinning. We are codesigning a PtDA to help people with increased genetic cancer risks manage choices. The aim of an innovative workshop described here was to engage with the people who will use the PtDA regarding the theoretical underpinning and logic model outlining our hypothesis of how the PtDA would lead to more informed decision-making.
Short presentations about psychological and behavioural theories by an expert were interspersed with facilitated, small-group discussions led by patients. Patients were asked what is important to them when they make health decisions, what theoretical constructs are most meaningful and how this should be applied to codesign of a PtDA. An artist created a visual summary. Notes from patient discussions and the artwork were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
The overarching theme was: It's personal. Contextual factors important for decision-making were varied and changed over time. There was no one 'best fit' theory to target support needs in a PtDA, suggesting an inductive, flexible framework approach to programme theory would be most effective. The PtDA logic model was revised based on patient feedback.
Meaningful codesign of PtDA including discussions about the theoretical mechanisms through which they support decision-making has the potential to lead to improved patient care through understanding the intricately personal nature of health decisions, and tailoring content and format for holistic care.
Patients with lived experience were involved in codesign and coproduction of this workshop and analysis as partners and coauthors. Patient discussions were the primary data source. Facilitators provided a semi-structured guide, but they did not influence the patient discussions or provide clinical advice. The premise of this workshop was to prioritise the importance of patient lived experience: to listen, learn, then reflect together to understand and propose ideas to improve patient care through codesign of a PtDA.
患者决策辅助工具(PtDA)与医疗保健专业人员共同进行共享决策,并提高决策质量。然而,PtDA 通常缺乏理论基础。我们正在共同设计一种 PtDA,以帮助有遗传癌症风险增加的人管理选择。本文介绍的一个创新研讨会的目的是让将使用 PtDA 的人参与到理论基础和逻辑模型的讨论中,阐述我们关于 PtDA 如何导致更明智决策的假设。
一位专家通过简短的演讲介绍了心理学和行为学理论,然后穿插进行了由患者主导的小组讨论。患者被问到他们在做出健康决策时最重要的是什么,哪些理论结构最有意义,以及如何将这些应用于 PtDA 的共同设计。一位艺术家创作了一个视觉概要。使用反思性主题分析对患者讨论和艺术品的笔记进行分析。
主题是:这是个人的。决策过程中的相关因素因人而异且随时间变化。没有一个“最佳”理论可以针对 PtDA 中的支持需求,这表明采用归纳、灵活的框架方法构建方案理论将是最有效的。根据患者的反馈,对 PtDA 的逻辑模型进行了修订。
PtDA 的有意义的共同设计,包括讨论它们支持决策的理论机制,有可能通过了解健康决策的复杂个人性质,并为整体护理量身定制内容和格式,从而改善患者护理。
有过生活经验的患者作为合作伙伴和共同作者参与了本次研讨会的共同设计和共同制作以及分析。患者讨论是主要的数据来源。主持人提供了一个半结构化的指南,但他们没有影响患者讨论或提供临床建议。本次研讨会的前提是重视患者的生活经验:倾听、学习,然后共同思考,通过共同设计 PtDA 来理解并提出改善患者护理的想法。