Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Practices and perspectives of patients and healthcare professionals on shared decision-making in nephrology
University of Borås, Faculty of Caring Science, Work Life and Social Welfare. Nivel (Netherlands institute for health services research), PO Box 1568, BN, Utrecht, 3500, Netherlands; Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud university medical center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1651-7544
Breuer&Intraval, Research and Consultancy, Groningen, Netherlands.
Nivel (Netherlands institute for health services research), PO Box 1568, BN, Utrecht, 3500, Netherlands.
Dutch Kidney Patients Association, Bussum, Netherlands.
Show others and affiliations
2022 (English)In: BMC Nephrology, E-ISSN 1471-2369, Vol. 23, no 1, article id 258Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background

Given the complexity and variety in treatment options for advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), shared decision-making (SDM) can be a challenge. SDM is needed for making decisions that best suit patients’ needs and their medical and living situations. SDM might be experienced differently by different stakeholders. This study aimed to explore clinical practice and perspectives on SDM in nephrology from three angles: observers, patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs).

 

Methods

An explanatory sequential mixed methods design was used. First, in the quantitative part of the study, outpatient consultations with patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (eGFR < 20 ml/min) were video recorded and SDM was assessed using the OPTION5 instrument. Subsequently, in the qualitative part, patients and HCPs reflected on their own SDM behaviour during individual stimulated recall interviews which were analysed using deductive thematic content analysis.

 

Results

Twenty nine consultations were recorded and observed in seven hospitals. The mean SDM score was 51 (range 25–80), indicating that SDM was applied to a moderate extent. The stimulated recall interviews with patients showed that they rely on the information provision and opinion of HCPs, expect consistency and support, and desire a proactive role. They also expect to be questioned by the HCP about their SDM preferences. HCPs said they were willing to incorporate patients’ preferences in SDM, as long as there are no medical contraindications. They also prefer patients to take a prominent role in SDM. HCPs ascribe various roles to themselves in supporting patients’ decision-making.

 

Conclusions

Although SDM was applied by HCPs to a moderate extent, improvement is needed, especially in helping patients get the information they need and in making sure that every patient is involved in SDM. This is even more important given the complex nature of the disease and the relatively high prevalence of limited health literacy among patients with chronic kidney disease.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BioMed Central, 2022. Vol. 23, no 1, article id 258
Keywords [en]
Communication, Shared decision-making, Nephrology, Observational study, Video-recording, Stimulated recall interviews, Qualitative study
National Category
Nursing
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-28377DOI: 10.1186/s12882-022-02887-4ISI: 000829767700001PubMedID: PMC9306155Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85134474208OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hb-28377DiVA, id: diva2:1687286
Available from: 2022-08-15 Created: 2022-08-15 Last updated: 2024-07-04Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1025 kB)45 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1025 kBChecksum SHA-512
9761dde64aa8013655f25dab0a99eefc85d4446d8749623b5958a8691ad980a9cbb8b17f8301b06b21145531edf63b487ecb67f2488198e5170c9675f5b1f171
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

van Dulmen, Sandra

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
van Dulmen, Sandra
By organisation
Faculty of Caring Science, Work Life and Social Welfare
In the same journal
BMC Nephrology
Nursing

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 45 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 44 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf