How does decision complexity affect shared decision making? An analysis of patient-provider antiretroviral initiation dialogue

Wynne Callon, Somnath (Som) Saha, Ira B. Wilson, Michael Barton Laws, Michele Massa, Philip (Todd) Korthuis, Victoria Sharp, Jonathan Cohn, Richard D. Moore, Mary Catherine Beach

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: This study analyzed patient-provider dialogue regarding anti-retroviral therapy (ART) initiation, assessing the degree to which shared decision making (SDM) occurred. Methods: We analyzed 24 audio-recorded dialogues between 14 HIV providers and their patients regarding ART initiation. We coded transcribed dialogues for seven SDM elements. We stratified dialogues into three levels of decision complexity (basic, intermediate, complex) based on patient CD4 counts and evaluated SDM criteria fulfillment at each level of decision complexity. Results: There were five basic, twelve intermediate, and seven . complex decisions in our sample. While only two met the defined criteria for SDM, the mean number of SDM elements present increased with each level of decision complexity. Discussion of the clinical issue requiring the decision occurred most frequently (88%), while discussion of pros/cons (13%), patient's understanding (21%), and decision alternatives (29%) occurred least frequently. Conclusion/Practice implications: While few dialogues met the defined SDM criteria, providers are having conversations that respond to decision complexity. Clinicians should be aware that discussion of pros/cons, alternatives, and uncertainties are frequently skipped, even when these elements are clearly relevant, as in complex decisions. In addition, rhetorical questions to assess patient preferences and understanding are insufficient to fully engage patients in SDM.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPatient Education and Counseling
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Sep 23 2016

Fingerprint

Decision Making
Patient Preference
CD4 Lymphocyte Count
Uncertainty
HIV
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Antiretroviral initiation
  • HIV/AIDS
  • Patient-provider communication
  • Shared decision making

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

How does decision complexity affect shared decision making? An analysis of patient-provider antiretroviral initiation dialogue. / Callon, Wynne; Saha, Somnath (Som); Wilson, Ira B.; Laws, Michael Barton; Massa, Michele; Korthuis, Philip (Todd); Sharp, Victoria; Cohn, Jonathan; Moore, Richard D.; Beach, Mary Catherine.

In: Patient Education and Counseling, 23.09.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Callon, Wynne ; Saha, Somnath (Som) ; Wilson, Ira B. ; Laws, Michael Barton ; Massa, Michele ; Korthuis, Philip (Todd) ; Sharp, Victoria ; Cohn, Jonathan ; Moore, Richard D. ; Beach, Mary Catherine. / How does decision complexity affect shared decision making? An analysis of patient-provider antiretroviral initiation dialogue. In: Patient Education and Counseling. 2016.
@article{9128b14012d24479abe2040260715dd9,
title = "How does decision complexity affect shared decision making? An analysis of patient-provider antiretroviral initiation dialogue",
abstract = "Objectives: This study analyzed patient-provider dialogue regarding anti-retroviral therapy (ART) initiation, assessing the degree to which shared decision making (SDM) occurred. Methods: We analyzed 24 audio-recorded dialogues between 14 HIV providers and their patients regarding ART initiation. We coded transcribed dialogues for seven SDM elements. We stratified dialogues into three levels of decision complexity (basic, intermediate, complex) based on patient CD4 counts and evaluated SDM criteria fulfillment at each level of decision complexity. Results: There were five basic, twelve intermediate, and seven . complex decisions in our sample. While only two met the defined criteria for SDM, the mean number of SDM elements present increased with each level of decision complexity. Discussion of the clinical issue requiring the decision occurred most frequently (88{\%}), while discussion of pros/cons (13{\%}), patient's understanding (21{\%}), and decision alternatives (29{\%}) occurred least frequently. Conclusion/Practice implications: While few dialogues met the defined SDM criteria, providers are having conversations that respond to decision complexity. Clinicians should be aware that discussion of pros/cons, alternatives, and uncertainties are frequently skipped, even when these elements are clearly relevant, as in complex decisions. In addition, rhetorical questions to assess patient preferences and understanding are insufficient to fully engage patients in SDM.",
keywords = "Antiretroviral initiation, HIV/AIDS, Patient-provider communication, Shared decision making",
author = "Wynne Callon and Saha, {Somnath (Som)} and Wilson, {Ira B.} and Laws, {Michael Barton} and Michele Massa and Korthuis, {Philip (Todd)} and Victoria Sharp and Jonathan Cohn and Moore, {Richard D.} and Beach, {Mary Catherine}",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
day = "23",
doi = "10.1016/j.pec.2016.12.013",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Patient Education and Counseling",
issn = "0738-3991",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How does decision complexity affect shared decision making? An analysis of patient-provider antiretroviral initiation dialogue

AU - Callon, Wynne

AU - Saha, Somnath (Som)

AU - Wilson, Ira B.

AU - Laws, Michael Barton

AU - Massa, Michele

AU - Korthuis, Philip (Todd)

AU - Sharp, Victoria

AU - Cohn, Jonathan

AU - Moore, Richard D.

AU - Beach, Mary Catherine

PY - 2016/9/23

Y1 - 2016/9/23

N2 - Objectives: This study analyzed patient-provider dialogue regarding anti-retroviral therapy (ART) initiation, assessing the degree to which shared decision making (SDM) occurred. Methods: We analyzed 24 audio-recorded dialogues between 14 HIV providers and their patients regarding ART initiation. We coded transcribed dialogues for seven SDM elements. We stratified dialogues into three levels of decision complexity (basic, intermediate, complex) based on patient CD4 counts and evaluated SDM criteria fulfillment at each level of decision complexity. Results: There were five basic, twelve intermediate, and seven . complex decisions in our sample. While only two met the defined criteria for SDM, the mean number of SDM elements present increased with each level of decision complexity. Discussion of the clinical issue requiring the decision occurred most frequently (88%), while discussion of pros/cons (13%), patient's understanding (21%), and decision alternatives (29%) occurred least frequently. Conclusion/Practice implications: While few dialogues met the defined SDM criteria, providers are having conversations that respond to decision complexity. Clinicians should be aware that discussion of pros/cons, alternatives, and uncertainties are frequently skipped, even when these elements are clearly relevant, as in complex decisions. In addition, rhetorical questions to assess patient preferences and understanding are insufficient to fully engage patients in SDM.

AB - Objectives: This study analyzed patient-provider dialogue regarding anti-retroviral therapy (ART) initiation, assessing the degree to which shared decision making (SDM) occurred. Methods: We analyzed 24 audio-recorded dialogues between 14 HIV providers and their patients regarding ART initiation. We coded transcribed dialogues for seven SDM elements. We stratified dialogues into three levels of decision complexity (basic, intermediate, complex) based on patient CD4 counts and evaluated SDM criteria fulfillment at each level of decision complexity. Results: There were five basic, twelve intermediate, and seven . complex decisions in our sample. While only two met the defined criteria for SDM, the mean number of SDM elements present increased with each level of decision complexity. Discussion of the clinical issue requiring the decision occurred most frequently (88%), while discussion of pros/cons (13%), patient's understanding (21%), and decision alternatives (29%) occurred least frequently. Conclusion/Practice implications: While few dialogues met the defined SDM criteria, providers are having conversations that respond to decision complexity. Clinicians should be aware that discussion of pros/cons, alternatives, and uncertainties are frequently skipped, even when these elements are clearly relevant, as in complex decisions. In addition, rhetorical questions to assess patient preferences and understanding are insufficient to fully engage patients in SDM.

KW - Antiretroviral initiation

KW - HIV/AIDS

KW - Patient-provider communication

KW - Shared decision making

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85008205725&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85008205725&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.pec.2016.12.013

DO - 10.1016/j.pec.2016.12.013

M3 - Article

C2 - 28012679

AN - SCOPUS:85008205725

JO - Patient Education and Counseling

JF - Patient Education and Counseling

SN - 0738-3991

ER -