Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • 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
Shared Decision-Making, Paternalism and Patient Choice
University of Borås, School of Health Science.
2010 (English)In: Health Care Analysis, ISSN 1065-3058, E-ISSN 1573-3394, Vol. 18, no 1, 60-84 p.Article in journal (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

n patient centred care, shared decision making is a central feature and widely referred to as a norm for patient centred medical consultation. However, it is far from clear how to distinguish SDM from standard models and ideals for medical decision making, such as paternalism and patient choice, and e.g., whether paternalism and patient choice can involve a greater degree of the sort of sharing involved in SDM and still retain their essential features. In the article, different versions of SDM are explored, versions compatible with paternalism and patient choice as well as versions that go beyond these traditional decision making models. Whenever SDM is discussed or introduced it is of importance to be clear over which of these different versions are being pursued, since they connect to basic values and ideals of health care in different ways. It is further argued that we have reason to pursue versions of SDM involving, what is called, a high level dynamics in medical decision-making. This leaves four alternative models to choose between depending on how we balance between the values of patient best interest, patient autonomy, and an effective decision in terms of patient compliance or adherence: Shared Rational Deliberative Patient Choice, Shared Rational Deliberative Paternalism, Shared Rational Deliberative Joint Decision, and Professionally Driven Best Interest Compromise. In relation to these models it is argued that we ideally should use the Shared Rational Deliberative Joint Decision model. However, when the patient and professional fail to reach consensus we will have reason to pursue the Professionally Driven Best Interest Compromise model since this will best harmonise between the different values at stake: patient best interest, patient autonomy, patient adherence and a continued care relationship.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer , 2010. Vol. 18, no 1, 60-84 p.
National Category
Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-3072DOI: 10.1007/s10728-008-0108-6Local ID: 2320/7627OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hb-3072DiVA: diva2:871168
Available from: 2015-11-13 Created: 2015-11-13

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full texthttp://gu-se.academia.edu/ChristianMunthe/Papers/117363/Shared_Decision_making_Paternalism_and_Patient_Choice

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Sandman, Lars
By organisation
School of Health Science
In the same journal
Health Care Analysis
Social Sciences Interdisciplinary

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 106 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • 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