Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Pediatr. 2014 Jul;165(1):178-183.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2014.03.042. Epub 2014 Apr 30.

Real life clinic visits do not match the ideals of shared decision making.

Author information

1
Division of Adolescent Medicine, Center for Innovation in Chronic Disease Care, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH; James M. Anderson Center for Health Systems Excellence, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH; University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH. Electronic address: ellen.lipstein@cchmc.org.
2
Division of Adolescent Medicine, Center for Innovation in Chronic Disease Care, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH.
3
Division of Adolescent Medicine, Center for Innovation in Chronic Disease Care, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH; James M. Anderson Center for Health Systems Excellence, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH; University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To use observation to understand how decisions about higher-risk treatments, such as biologics, are made in pediatric chronic conditions.

METHODS:

Gastroenterology and rheumatology providers who prescribe biologics were recruited. Families were recruited when they had an outpatient appointment in which treatment with biologics was likely to be discussed. Consent/assent was obtained to video the visit. Audio of the visits in which a discussion of biologics took place were transcribed and analyzed. Our coding structure was based on prior research, shared decision making (SDM) concepts, and the initial recorded visits. Coded data were analyzed using content analysis and comparison with an existing model of SDM.

RESULTS:

We recorded 21 visits that included discussions of biologics. In most visits, providers initiated the decision-making discussion. Detailed information was typically given about the provider's preferred option with less information about other options. There was minimal elicitation of preferences, treatment goals, or prior knowledge. Few parents or patients spontaneously stated their preferences or concerns. An implicit or explicit treatment recommendation was given in nearly all visits, although rarely requested. In approximately one-third of the visits, the treatment decision was never made explicit, yet steps were taken to implement the provider's preferred treatment.

CONCLUSIONS:

We observed limited use of SDM, despite previous research indicating that parents wish to collaborate in decision making. To better achieve SDM in chronic conditions, providers and families need to strive for bidirectional sharing of information and an explicit family role in decision making.

PMID:
24795203
PMCID:
PMC4106460
DOI:
10.1016/j.jpeds.2014.03.042
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Support Center