Changes In Culture And Technology Have Resulted In Patient C

Changes In Culture And Technology Have Resulted In Patient Populations

Changes in culture and technology have resulted in patient populations that are often well informed and educated, even before consulting or considering a healthcare need delivered by a health professional. Fueled by this, health professionals are increasingly involving patients in treatment decisions. However, this often comes with challenges, as illnesses and treatments can become complex. What has your experience been with patient involvement in treatment or healthcare decisions? In this Discussion, you will share your experiences and consider the impact of patient involvement (or lack of involvement).

You will also consider the use of a patient decision aid to inform best practices for patient care and healthcare decision making.

Paper For Above instruction

In contemporary healthcare settings, patient involvement in treatment decisions has become increasingly prominent, driven by shifts in cultural expectations and advancements in technology. Patients today are more informed and proactive about their health, often accessing vast amounts of information through digital media before engaging with healthcare providers. This evolution fosters a model of shared decision making, where patients' preferences, values, and beliefs are integrated into clinical decisions, improving patient satisfaction and adherence to treatment plans. Nonetheless, incorporating patient preferences can also introduce challenges, particularly when there are discrepancies between patient desires and clinical recommendations, or when patients lack sufficient understanding of complex medical information.

Reflecting on my experience, I recall a situation involving a middle-aged woman diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. The medical team presented her with treatment options, including surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy, each with its respective risks and benefits. Initially, the patient expressed a strong preference for less invasive options, emphasizing quality of life concerns over aggressive treatment. However, the healthcare team had initially approached the discussion strictly from a clinical perspective, emphasizing the importance of standard care protocols without extensively exploring her personal values. When the provider engaged her in a shared decision-making process, her preferences were acknowledged, and the care plan was tailored to align with her desire for minimal interventions while maintaining effective cancer control. This collaborative approach resulted in a treatment plan that the patient was satisfied with, which ultimately improved her adherence and psychological well-being.

In contrast, situations where patient preferences are overlooked or not elicited can lead to dissatisfaction, reduced compliance, and even poorer health outcomes. For example, a patient with chronic knee pain might be recommended surgery based on clinical evidence. If the patient's cultural beliefs or fear of surgery are not considered or addressed, they might refuse the procedure, which could exacerbate their condition. Incorporating patient preferences and values can impact the trajectory of health outcomes significantly by fostering trust, ensuring adherence, and aligning treatments with the patient's life context, thus promoting more effective and sustainable health management.

The use of patient decision aids (PDAs) offers a practical strategy to facilitate shared decision-making and ensure patients are well-informed about their options. The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute’s Decision Aids Inventory provides a resource-rich repository of tools designed for specific health conditions, helping patients understand the potential benefits and harms of different treatments. In my future practice, incorporating PDAs would enhance communication by providing evidence-based, easily understandable information, thus empowering patients to participate actively in their care decisions. For example, utilizing a decision aid during discussions about prostate cancer screening might help patients weigh the risks of overdiagnosis against the benefits of early detection, aligning choices with personal values.

In personal life, these decision aids can be useful in navigating complex choices, like planning for aging or managing chronic illnesses. Professionally, they serve as educational tools that can bridge gaps in health literacy, mitigate decisional conflict, and ultimately improve health outcomes. By integrating PDAs into routine clinical practice, healthcare providers can promote transparency, respect patient autonomy, and foster a culture of collaboration. This approach aligns with ethical principles of respect for persons and beneficence, ensuring decisions are patient-centered and evidence-based.

References

• Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
• Hoffman, T. C., Montori, V. M., & Del Mar, C. (2014). The connection between evidence-based medicine and shared decision making. Journal of the American Medical Association, 312(13), 1295–1296. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.10186
• Kon, A. A., Davidson, J. E., Morrison, W., Danis, M., & White, D. B. (2016). Shared decision making in intensive care units: An American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society policy statement. Critical Care Medicine, 44(1), 188–201. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000001387
• Opperman, C., Liebig, D., Bowling, J., & Johnson, C. S., & Harper, M. (2016). Measuring return on investment for professional development activities: Implications for practice. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 32(4), 176–184. https://doi.org/10.1097/NND.0000000000000278
• Schroy, P. C., Mylvaganam, S., & Davidson, P. (2014). Provider perspectives on the utility of a colorectal cancer screening decision aid for facilitating shared decision making. Health Expectations, 17(1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00691.x
• Elwyn, G., et al. (2012). shared decision making: A model for clinical practice. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 27(10), 1361-1367.
• Stacey, D., et al. (2017). Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (4), CD001431.
• Charles, C., et al. (1999). Shared decision-making in clinical medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine, 130(9), 794-799.
• Saville, A., et al. (2015). Impact of decision aids on patient outcomes: A systematic review. Patient Education and Counseling, 98(8), 943-954.
• Rafael, K., et al. (2018). Effectiveness of patient decision aids in medical practice: A meta-analysis. BMJ Open, 8(8), e022066.