You Will Share Your Experience See Below For Experience

You Will Share Your Experience See Below For Experience And Consider

You will share your experience (see below for experience) 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. 350 word discussion. At least 2 References (I have attached some to utilize) within last 5 years and cited in discussion. Apa format -Review the Resources (I attached articles) and reflect on a time when you experienced a patient being brought into (or not being brought into) a decision regarding their treatment plan. -This is the experience: Treatment is limited for patient with stage 4 cancer and they are considering going on hospice to have better quality life. (you can include any details you would like) -Review the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute’s Decision Aids Inventory at . Choose “For Specific Conditions,†then Browse an alphabetical listing of decision aids by health topic. Type in ‘hospice’ Try to use this link to take you right to the hospice link on that site The discussion: -Post a brief description of the situation you experienced and explain how incorporating or not incorporating patient preferences and values impacted the outcome of their treatment plan . Be specific and provide examples . -Then, explain how including patient preferences and values might impact the trajectory of the situation and how these were reflected in the treatment plan. -Finally, explain the value of the patient decision aid you selected and how it might contribute to effective decision making, both in general and in the experience you described. Describe how you might use this decision aid inventory in your professional practice or personal life.-you have to reference and use the decision aid site listed above. Here are references attached 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. doi:10.1111/j..2011.00730.x 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. doi:10.1097/CCM. 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, ), 1295–1296. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.10186

Paper For Above instruction

In the complex realm of end-of-life care, shared decision-making plays a pivotal role in aligning treatment options with patient values and preferences. The scenario I experienced involved a patient diagnosed with stage IV pancreatic cancer contemplating hospice care to improve quality of life. The decision-making process was crucial, as the patient’s values regarding comfort and personal dignity significantly impacted their chosen path. However, the interaction lacked sufficient incorporation of the patient’s preferences, primarily due to limited communication and the absence of a structured decision aid, leading to a treatment plan that did not fully reflect their desires.

The absence of a comprehensive discussion around the patient’s goals led to a somewhat paternalistic approach. The healthcare team focused on clinical indicators and survival statistics, which, although important, overshadowed the patient’s psychosocial needs and desire for a peaceful end-of-life experience. This oversight often results in decisions that may not align with the patient’s values, potentially causing regret or dissatisfaction. A notable example was when the patient expressed a desire to prioritize comfort and spend quality time with family, yet they felt pressured into more aggressive treatments initially. The lack of an explicit process to elicit these preferences limited their sense of autonomy and potentially distorted the treatment trajectory.

In contrast, integrating patient preferences and values through shared decision-making could significantly alter such scenarios. Utilizing tools like the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute’s Decision Aids Inventory—specifically, the hospice decision aid—can facilitate a structured dialogue. This aid provides balanced, evidence-based information about options, benefits, and risks, empowering patients to make informed choices aligned with their values (Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 2023). If such an aid had been employed, the patient could have better understood the implications of hospice care, clarifying that prioritizing comfort was both a valid and supported choice, thereby aligning treatment with their wishes from the outset.

The value of the selected decision aid lies in its capacity to foster meaningful conversations, ensuring that patient values are explicitly considered. In practice, I would incorporate this tool to guide conversations, enhance understanding, and support informed consent. For example, I could introduce the aid early in discussions with patients facing serious conditions, allowing them to weigh options carefully while feeling more autonomous and supported. This approach not only improves individual patient outcomes but also aligns healthcare practices with principles of ethical shared decision-making—improving satisfaction, reducing unnecessary interventions, and honoring patient dignity (Kon et al., 2016).

In summary, engaging patients through decision aids and shared decision-making processes ensures that treatment aligns with their core values. The specific example highlights the importance of structured tools in facilitating autonomy and informed choices at critical junctures in care. As a future healthcare professional, incorporating decision aids like those from the Ottawa Institute will be integral in promoting patient-centered, ethically sound care that respects individual preferences and enhances overall satisfaction.

References

  • 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
  • Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. (2023). Decision Aids Inventory. Retrieved from https://decisionaid.ohri.ca
  • 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..2011.00730.x
  • Hoffman, T. C., Montori, V. M., & Del Mar, C. (2014). The connection between evidence-based medicine and shared decision making. JAMA, 312(13), 1295–1296. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.10186

Related Assignments