Clinical Priority Setting and Decision-Making in Sweden: A Cross-sectional Survey Among Physicians.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Priority setting in healthcare that aims to achieve a fair and efficient allocation of limited resources is a worldwide challenge. Sweden has developed a sophisticated approach. Still, there is a need for a more detailed insight on how measures permeate clinical life. This study aimed to assess physicians' views regarding (1) impact of scarce resources on patient care, (2) clinical decision-making, and (3) the ethical platform and national guidelines for healthcare by the National Board of Health and Welfare (NBHW).Methods
An online cross-sectional questionnaire was sent to two groups in Sweden, 2016 and 2017. Group 1 represented 331 physicians from different departments at one University hospital and group 2 consisted of 923 members of the Society of Cardiology.Results
Overall, a 26% (328/1254) response rate was achieved, 49% in group 1 (162/331), 18% in group 2 (166/923). Scarcity of resources was perceived by 59% more often than 'at least once per month,' whilst 60% felt less than 'well-prepared' to address this issue. Guidelines in general had a lot of influence and 19% perceived them as limiting decision-making. 86% professed to be mostly independent in decision-making. 36% knew the ethical platform 'well' and 'very well' and 64% NBHW's national guidelines. 57% expressed a wish for further knowledge and training regarding the ethical platform and 51% for support in applying NBHW's national guidelines.Conclusion
There was a need for more support to deal with scarcity of resources and for increased knowledge about the ethical platform and NBHW's national guidelines. Independence in clinical decision-making was perceived as high and guidelines in general as important. Priority setting as one potential pathway to fair and transparent decision-making should be highlighted more in Swedish clinical settings, with special emphasis on the ethical platform.
SUBMITTER: Drees C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9808196 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Clinical Priority Setting and Decision-Making in Sweden: A Cross-sectional Survey Among Physicians.
Drees Catharina C Krevers Barbro B Ekerstad Niklas N Rogge Annette A Borzikowsky Christoph C McLennan Stuart S Buyx Alena M AM
International journal of health policy and management 20210315 7
<h4>Background</h4>Priority setting in healthcare that aims to achieve a fair and efficient allocation of limited resources is a worldwide challenge. Sweden has developed a sophisticated approach. Still, there is a need for a more detailed insight on how measures permeate clinical life. This study aimed to assess physicians' views regarding (1) impact of scarce resources on patient care, (2) clinical decision-making, and (3) the ethical platform and national guidelines for healthcare by the Nati ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundHormone therapy is one option for some types of prostate cancer. Shared decision making (SDM) is important in the decision making process, but SDM between prostate cancer patients receiving hormone therapy and physicians is not fully understood. This study tested hypotheses: "Patients' perception of SDM is associated with treatment satisfaction, mediated by satisfaction with physicians' explanations and perceived effective decision making" and "The amount of information provided to patients by physicians on diseases and treatment is associated with treatment satisfaction mediated by patients' perceived SDM and satisfaction with physicians' explanations."MethodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted using an online panel via a private research company in Japan. The participants in this study were patients registered with the panel who had received or were currently receiving hormone therapy for prostate cancer and physicians registered with the panel who were treating patients with prostate cancer. Measures used in this study included a nine-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire, levels of satisfaction with physicians' explanations and treatment satisfaction, and effective decision making for patients (feeling the choice is informed, value-based, likely to be implemented and expressing satisfaction with the choice), and a Shared Decision Making Questionnaire for Doctors. The hypotheses were examined using path analysis.ResultsIn total, 124 patients and 150 physicians were included in the analyses. In keeping with our hypotheses, perceived SDM significantly correlated with the physicians' explanations and perceived effective decision making for patients, and satisfaction with physicians' explanations and perceived effective decision making for patients were both related to treatment satisfaction. Although the amount of information provided to patients was correlated with the perceived SDM, it was indirectly related to their satisfaction with physicians' explanations.ConclusionsWhen physicians encourage patients to be actively involved in making decisions about treatment through the SDM process while presenting a wide range of information at the start of hormone therapy, patients' effective decision making and physicians' explanations may be improved; consequently, the patients' overall treatment satisfaction may be improved. Physicians who treat patients with prostate cancer may have underestimated the importance of SDM before starting hormone therapy, even greater extent than patients.
| S-EPMC7734751 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe lack of evidence-based recommendations for therapeutic decisions during the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic creates a unique scenario of clinical decision making which is worth to analyze. We aim to identify the drivers of therapeutic aggressiveness during the first weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis cross-sectional worldwide survey (conducted April 12 to 19, 2020) was aimed at physicians who managed patients diagnosed with COVID-19. Treatment preferences were collected in five different clinical scenarios. We used multilevel mixed-effects ordered logistic regression to identify variables that were associated with the use of more aggressive therapies.FindingsThe survey was completed by 852 physicians from 44 different specialties and 29 countries. The heterogeneity of therapeutic decisions increased as the clinical scenario worsened. Factors associated with aggressive therapeutic decisions were higher self-perceived expertise (high vs. null, OR 1.95, 95%CI 1.31-2.89), perceived quality of COVID-19 publications (high vs. null, OR 1.92, 95%CI 1.17-3.16), and female sex (OR 1.17, 95%CI 1.02-1.33). Conversely, Infectious Diseases specialty, Latin American and North American origin, lower confidence in the treatments chosen, and having published articles indexed in PubMed as the first-author were associated with the use of less aggressive therapies.InterpretationOur study provides insight into the drivers of the decision-making process during a new and extreme health emergency. Different factors including the perceived expertise and quality of publications, gender, geographic origin, medical specialty and implication in medical research influenced this process. The clinical severity attenuated the physician's tolerance for uncertainty.FundingNo funding was required.
| S-EPMC7480231 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInstances of surrogate decision-making are expected to increase with the rise in hospitalised older adults in Japan. Few large-scale studies have comprehensively examined the entire surrogate decision-making process. This study aimed to gather information to assess the current state of surrogate decision-making in Japan.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted using online questionnaires. A total of 1000 surrogate decision-makers responded to the questionnaire. We examined the characteristics of surrogate decision-makers and patients, content of surrogate decision-making meeting regarding life-sustaining treatment between the doctors and surrogate decision-makers, extent of involvement of the various parties in the surrogate decision-making process, judgement grounds for surrogate decision-making, and frequency of involvement in the surrogate decision-making process.ResultsOf the participants, 70.5% were male and 48.3% were eldest sons. Only 7.6% of the patients had left a written record of their preferences and 48.8% of the surrogates reported no knowledge of the patient having expressed their prior intentions regarding medical care in any form. Respondents indicated that their family meetings with healthcare professionals mostly included the information recommended by guidelines in a surrogate decision-making meeting in Japan. Most participants reported a good understanding of the meeting content. Although many participants based their decisions on multiple grounds, surrogates' considerations may not adequately reflect respect for patient autonomy in Japan. Specifically, the eldest son considered his own preference more frequently than that of the other surrogate decision-makers. In 26.1% of the cases, either zero or one family meeting with healthcare professionals was held. In these cases, significantly fewer decisions involved the participation of healthcare professionals other than the doctor compared to cases with multiple meetings.ConclusionsSurrogate decisions in Japan are most commonly made by eldest sons and may not frequently consider the perspectives of other surrogates. The finding that patient preferences were rarely known suggests a role for increased advance care planning.
| S-EPMC8464150 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough previous research shows broad differences in the impact of online health information on patient-practitioner decision making, specific research is required to identify and conceptualize patient decision-making styles related to the use of online health information and to differentiate segments according to the influence of online information on patient decision making and interactions with health professionals.ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate patients' decision making in relation to online health information and interactions with health care practitioners. We also aimed to present a typology of patients based on significant differences in their decision making.MethodsWe applied a large-scale cross-sectional research design using a survey. Data, generated using a questionnaire that was administered by companies specializing in providing online panels, were collected from random samples of baby boomers in the United Kingdom, the United States, and New Zealand. The total sample comprised 996 baby boomers born between 1946 and 1964, who had used the internet in the previous 6 months to search for and share health-related information. Data were analyzed using hierarchical cluster analysis and confirmatory factor analysis, as well as one-way analysis of variance, chi-square tests, and paired sample t tests.ResultsAnalyses identified 3 key decision-making styles that served as the base for 4 unique and stable segments of patients with distinctive decision-making styles: the Collaborators (229/996, 23.0%), the Autonomous-Collaborators (385/996, 38.7%), the Assertive-Collaborators (111/996, 11.1%), and the Passives (271/996, 27.2%). Profiles were further developed for these segments according to key differences in the online health information behavior, demographics, and interactional behaviors of patients. The typology demonstrates that collaborative decision making is dominant among patients either in its pure form or in combination with autonomous or assertive decision making. In other words, most patients (725/996, 72.8%) show significant collaboration in their decision making with health care professionals. However, at times, patients in the combination Autonomous-Collaborative segment prefer to exercise individual autonomy in their decision making, and those in the combination Assertive-Collaborative segment prefer to be assertive with health professionals. Finally, this study shows that a substantial number of patients adopt a distinctly passive decision-making style (271/996, 27.2%).ConclusionsThe patient typology provides a framework for distinguishing practice-relevant and addressable segments with important implications for health care practitioners, including better-targeted communication programs for patients and more successful outcomes for health care services in the long term.
| S-EPMC6893560 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDelivering patient-centered care is a declared objective of many health delivery systems globally, especially in an era of value-based health care. It entails the active engagement of the patients in healthcare decisions related to their health, also known as shared decision making (SDM). Little is known about the role of gender in shaping the perspective of patients on their opportunity for engaging in SDM in the Arabian Gulf Region. The aim of this study is to investigate the role of gender in shaping patients' perspectives toward their opportunity for SDM in Dubai, UAE.MethodsThis study utilized a cross-sectional survey consisting of sociodemographic questions and the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). A total of 50 physicians (25 females and 25 males), practicing at a large private healthcare delivery network in Dubai, were recruited using convenience sampling. Ten patients of every recruited physician (5 male and 5 female) were surveyed (i.e., a total of 500 patients). Statistical analysis assessed the differences in patients' perceptions of physician SDM attitude scores by physicians' and patients' gender using independent t-test, ANOVA-test, and Chi-square analyses.FindingsA total of 50 physicians and 500 patients (250 male patients and 250 female patients) participated in this study. The odd of patients agreement was significantly lower for male physicians, compared to their female counterparts, on the following elements of SDM: the doctor precisely explaining the advantages and disadvantages of the treatment (OR = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.34-0.88, p = 0.012); the doctor helping them understand the information (OR = 0.47, 95%CI: 0.23-0.97, p = 0.038), the doctor asking about preferred treatment option (OR = 0.52, 95%CI: 0.35-0.77, p = 0.001), and the doctor thoroughly weighting the different treatment options (OR = 0.60, 95%CI: 0.41-0.90, p = 0.013). No significant associations were observed between patients' gender and their perception of their opportunity for SDM. Likewise, no significant associations were observed between the same or different physician-patient gender and patients' perception of physicians' SDM attitudes. Statistically significant associations were observed between physician-patient gender and preferred treatment option for patients (p = 0.012).ConclusionStudy findings suggest that while there were no differences in patients' perspective on SDM by the gender of patients, significant differences were observed by the gender of physicians. Female physicians, compared to their male counterparts, were more engaged in SDM, with both male and female patients. Male physician-female patient dyad received the lowest scores on SDM. This could be explained by the cultural, social, and religious sensitivities that infiltrate the physician-patient relationship in the Arab contexts. Despite the multi-cultural nature of the country, some female patients may still experience some discomfort in opening up and in discussion preferences with male physicians. For physicians, striking the right balance between assertiveness and SDM is necessary within the cultural context, especially among male providers. Offering targeted learning and development programs on the importance and practice of SDM is also necessary to ensure equitable opportunity for engagement in SDM for all patients irrespective of the gender of their provider.
| S-EPMC9436052 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clinical decision-making is a complex process influenced by clinical and non-clinical factors. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between provider, patient, and practice factors with clinical decision-making among dentists in Ontario, Canada's most populated province and its largest dental care market. This was a cross-sectional, self-administered survey of a random sample of general dentists in Ontario (n = 3,201). The 46-item survey collected demographic, professional, and practice information. The outcome (treatment intensity) was measured using a set of clinical scenarios, which categorized dentists as either relatively aggressive or conservative in their treatment decisions. Associations were assessed using bivariate analysis and logistic regressions. One thousand and seventy-five dentists responded (33.6% response rate). Age (p = 0.001), place of initial training (p<0.001), number of dependents (p = 0.001), number of hygienists employed (p = 0.001), and perceptions of practice loans (p = 0.020) were associated with treatment intensity. Dentists who were <40-years old (OR = 2.06, 95% CI:1.39-3.06, p<0.001), American-trained (OR = 2.48, 95% CI:1.51-4.06, p<0.001), and perceived their practice loans as large (OR = 1.57, 95% CI:1.02-2.42, p = 0.039), were relatively more aggressive in their treatment decisions. Various non-clinical factors appear to influence the clinical decision-making of dentists in Ontario.
| S-EPMC7274387 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Due to a low birth rate and an aging population, Japan faces an increase in the number of elderly people without children living in single households. These elderly without a spouse and/or children encounter a lack of caregivers because most sources of care for the elderly in Japan are not provided by private agencies but by family members. However, family caregivers not only help with daily living but are also key participants in treatment decision making. The effect of family absence on treatment decision making has not been elucidated, although more elderly people will not have family members to make surrogate decisions on their behalf. OBJECTIVE:The aim is to understand the influence of family absence on treatment decision making by physicians through a cross-sectional online survey with three hypothetical vignettes of patients. METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional online survey among Japanese physicians using three hypothetical vignettes. The first vignette was about a 65-year-old man with alcoholic liver cirrhosis and the second was about a 78-year-old woman with dementia, both of whom developed pneumonia with consciousness disturbance. The third vignette was about a 70-year-old woman with necrosis of her lower limb. Participants were randomly assigned to either of the two versions of the questionnaires-with family or without family-but methods were identical otherwise. Participants chose yes or no responses to questions about whether they would perform the presented medical procedures. RESULTS:Among 1112 physicians, 454 (40.8%) completed the survey; there were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between groups. Significantly fewer physicians had a willingness to perform dialysis (odds ratio [OR] 0.55, 95% CI 0.34-0.80; P=.002) and artificial ventilation (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35-0.75; P<.001) for a patient from vignette 1 without family. In vignette 2, fewer physicians were willing to perform artificial ventilation (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.90; P=.02). In vignette 3, significantly fewer physicians showed willingness to perform wound treatment (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.31-0.84; P=.007), surgery (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.22-0.57; P<.001), blood transfusion (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.31-0.66; P<.001), vasopressor (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34-0.72; P<.001), dialysis (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.24-0.59; P<.001), artificial ventilation (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15-0.40; P<.001), and chest compression (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.18-0.47; P<.001) for a patient without family. CONCLUSIONS:Elderly patients may have treatments withheld because of the absence of family, highlighting the potential importance of advance care planning in the era of an aging society with a declining birth rate.
| S-EPMC6764328 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe use of artificial nutrition in the last month of life raises many concerns for patients, relatives, and healthcare professionals.AimTo describe physicians and nurses' beliefs, knowledge, and decision-making related to introducing and withdrawing artificial nutrition at the end-of-life. Physicians and nurses' factors affecting these decisions were examined.DesignA cross-sectional study was conducted between May and July 2022. A questionnaire was sent by email to physicians and nurses.Setting and participantsPhysicians and nurses working in internal medicine, oncology, and palliative medicine divisions in three Swiss University Hospitals.ResultsTwo hundred and thirty physicians and nurses completed the survey (21% response rate). Most responders, aged 25-45, were women with < 10 years of experience, 61% lacked palliative care experience. End-of-life decision-making on artificial nutrition was reported as common by 89%. Whereas physicians and nurses played an important role in the decision, fulfilling patients' wishes (84% of cases) tended to dominate over professionals' intentions (physicians 52%, nurses 67%) as motivators at final decision. The main reasons for introducing artificial nutrition included improving nutritional status (54%), reducing broncho-aspiration (67%), and preventing pressure ulcers (53%). Having palliative care experience was the only variable modifying the beliefs of these motivations.ConclusionWhereas decisions on artificial nutrition at the end of life are common they may be mostly guided by physicians and nurses' beliefs, and patients' requests more than by robust evidence. Fostering palliative care education is pivotal. Our results emphasize the need to improve physicians and nurses' awareness of the complex interplay between values and evidence when decisions concerning artificial nutrition are taken.
| S-EPMC11914226 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAround the world, regulatory bodies have taken the lead in determining the competencies required to become a physician. As a first step in addressing this project, it was decided to develop a set of core competencies that were unique to China and that might serve as a basis for medical education. The purpose of this paper was to construct a competency model for clinical physicians in China.MethodsData was collected using a cross-sectional survey of 6247 clinicians from seven administrative regions (31 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government) in China. The total sample was randomly divided into two sub-samples, an initial sample (Sample 1) and a replication sample (Sample 2). Independent exploratory factor analysis was conducted in each sample and the results were compared to determine the stability. After that the confirmatory factor analysis was used to ascertain the competency model for physicians. The reliability, convergent and discriminant validity of competency-based instrument were also examined.Results76 items with 8 dimensions were identified, accounting for 68.41% of the construct's total variance in the initial sample and 67.47% in the replication sample. For the two samples, the overall scale reliability (Cronbach's alpha) was both 0.985 with dimensions from 0.905 to 0.954 for the initial sample and from 0.902 to 0.955 for the replication sample after deleting the items. In confirmatory factor analysis, the result showed that all items had acceptable goodness of fit index. RMSEA and SRMR were less than 0.08 (RMSEA = 0.046, SRMR = 0.040), while GFI, NFI, IFI, and CFI were higher than 0.9 (GFI = 0.905, NFI = 0.903, IFI = 0.909, CFI = 0.909), leading to acceptable construct validity. All construct reliability values of the factors were higher than 0.70, and all average variance extracted values exceeded 0.50. Thus, we considered the reliability and validity of the 8 dimensions were acceptable.ConclusionsThe instrument was shown to be both valid and reliable for measuring clinical physicians' competency in China. The results of the competency-based instrument can be used by ministry of health and administrators of hospitals to assess physicians' competencies, encourage and guide them to modify their behaviors according to the evaluation criteria, and also cultivate physicians with strong clinical practice, innovation and independent scientific research ability. Through these measurements and understandings, the overall level of clinical physicians will be increased in China.
| S-EPMC5147829 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWhile shared decision making (SDM) promotes health-related decisions that are informed, value-based and adhered to, few studies report on theory-based approaches to SDM adoption by healthcare professionals. We aimed to identify the factors influencing dietitians' intentions to adopt two SDM behaviours: 1) present dietary treatment options to patients and 2) help patients clarify their values and preferences.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional postal survey based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour among 428 randomly selected dietitians working in clinical practice across the Province of Quebec, Canada. We performed descriptive analyses and multiple regression analyses to determine the variables that explained the variance in intention to perform the behaviours.ResultsA total of 203 dietitians completed the questionnaire. Their ages were from 23 to 66 and they had been practising dietetics for 15.4±11.1 years (mean ± SD). On a scale from 1 to 7 (from strongly disagree to strongly agree), dietitians' intentions to present dietary treatment options and to clarify their patients' values and preferences were 5.00±1.14 and 5.68±0.74, respectively. Perceived behavioural control (??=?0.56, ?<0.0001), subjective norm (??=?0.16, ?<0.05), and moral norm (??=?0.22, ?<0.0001), were the factors significantly predicting the intention to present dietary treatment options, while perceived behavioural control (??=?0.60, ?<0.0001), attitude (??=?0.20, ?<0.05), and professional norm (??=?0.22, ?<0.001), significantly predicted the intention to help patients' clarify their values and preferences.ConclusionOur results showed that dietitians intend to adopt the two SDM behaviours studied. Factors influencing intention were different for each behaviour, except for perceived behavioural control which was common to both behaviours. Thus, perceived behavioural control could be a key factor in interventions aiming to encourage implementation of SDM by dietitians.
| S-EPMC3659101 | biostudies-literature