FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3131816492> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3131816492 endingPage "1516" @default.
• W3131816492 startingPage "1506" @default.
• W3131816492 abstract "Shared decision-making aims to combine what matters most to a patient with clinician expertise to develop a personalized health strategy. It is a dialogue between patient and clinician in which preferences are expressed, misconceptions reoriented, and available options are considered. To improve patient involvement, it would help to know more about specific barriers and facilitators of patient-clinician communication. Health literacy, the ability to obtain, process, and understand health information, may affect patient participation in decision-making. If the patient is quiet, deferential, and asks few questions, the clinician may assume a more paternalistic style. A patient with greater agency and engagement could be the catalyst for shared decisions.We assessed (1) whether effective clinician communication and effort is related to patient health literacy, and (2) if there are other factors associated with effective clinician communication and effort.We combined a prospective, cross-sectional cohort of 86 audio-recorded visits of adult patients seeking specialist hand care for a new problem at an urban community hospital in the Netherlands with a cohort of 72 audio-recorded hand surgery visits from a tertiary hospital in the United States collected for a prior study. The American cohort represents a secondary use of data from a set of patients from a separate study using audio-recorded visits and administering similar questionnaires that assessed different endpoints. In both cohorts, adult patients seeking specialist hand care for a new problem were screened. In total, 165 patients were initially screened, of which 96% (158) participated. Eight percent (13) of visits were excluded since the final diagnosis remained unclear, 8% (12) since it was not the first consultation for the current problem, 5% (8) in which only one treatment option was available, and < 1% (1) since there was a language barrier. A total of 123 patients were analyzed, 68 from the Netherlands and 55 from the United States. The Newest Vital Sign (NVS) health literacy test, validated in both English and Dutch, measures the ability to use health information and is based on a nutrition label from an ice cream container. It was used to assess patient health literacy on a scale ranging from 0 (low) to 6 (high). The 5-item Observing Patient Involvement (OPTION5) instrument is commonly used to assess the quality of patient-clinician discussion of options. Scores may be influenced by clinician effort to involve patients in decision-making as well as patient engagement and agency. Each item is scored from 0 (no effort) to 4 (maximum effort), with a total maximum score of 20. Two independent raters reached agreement (kappa value 0.8; strong agreement), after which all recordings were scored by one investigator. Visit duration and patient questions were assessed using the audio recordings. Patients had a median (interquartile range) age of 54 (38 to 66) years, 50% were men, 89% were white, 66% had a nontraumatic diagnosis, median (IRQ) years of education was 16 (12 to 18) years, and median (IQR) health literacy score was 5 (2 to 6). Median (IQR) visit duration was 9 (7 to 12) minutes. Cohorts did not differ in important ways. The number of visits per clinician ranged from 14 to 29, and the mean overall communication effectiveness and effort score for the visits was low (8.5 ± 4.2 points of 20 points). A multivariate linear regression model was used to assess factors associated with communication effectiveness and effort.There was no correlation between health literacy and clinician communication effectiveness and effort (r = 0.087 [95% CI -0.09 to 0.26]; p = 0.34), nor was there a difference in means (SD) when categorizing health literacy as inadequate (7.8 ± 3.8 points) and adequate (8.9 ± 4.5 points; mean difference 1.0 [95% CI -2.6 to 0.54]; p = 0.20). After controlling for potential confounding variables such as gender, patient questions, and health literacy, we found that longer visit duration (per 1 minute increase: r2 = 0.31 [95% CI -0.14 to 0.48]; p < 0.001), clinician 3 (compared with clinician 1: OR 33 [95% CI 4.8 to 229]; p < 0.001) and clinician 5 (compared with clinician 1: OR 11 [95% CI 1.5 to 80]; p = < 0.02) were independently associated with more effective communication and effort, whereas clinician 6 was associated with less effective communication and effort (compared with clinician 1: OR 0.08 [95% CI 0.01 to 0.75]; p = 0.03). Clinicians' communication strategies (the clinician variable on its own) accounted for 29% of the variation in communication effectiveness and effort, longer visit duration accounted for 11%, and the full model accounted for 47% of the variation (p < 0.001).The finding that the overall low mean communication effectiveness and effort differed between clinicians and was not influenced by patient factors including health literacy suggests clinicians may benefit from training that moves them away from a teaching or lecturing style where patients receive rote directives regarding their health. Clinicians can learn to adapt their communication to specific patient values and needs using a guiding rather than directing communication style (motivational interviewing).Level of Evidence Level II, prognostic study." @default.
• W3131816492 created "2021-03-01" @default.
• W3131816492 creator A5000497890 @default.
• W3131816492 creator A5033458539 @default.
• W3131816492 creator A5055651068 @default.
• W3131816492 creator A5061947579 @default.
• W3131816492 creator A5086723282 @default.
• W3131816492 creator A5090051943 @default.
• W3131816492 date "2021-02-24" @default.
• W3131816492 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W3131816492 title "Clinician Factors Rather Than Patient Factors Affect Discussion of Treatment Options" @default.
• W3131816492 cites W1794255315 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W1804917963 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W1942996532 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2008075549 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2009478572 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2011840006 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2022847225 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2025301113 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2028144142 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2034000237 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2049319957 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2078378191 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2078516501 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2085986943 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2099246599 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2105099865 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2107540415 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2114053077 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2114414844 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2119559196 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2126120223 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2140762161 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2142455310 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2164777277 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2169727328 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2202529936 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2213718736 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2214529617 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2216079545 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2238357174 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2257237205 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2268258742 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2314952340 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2507169601 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2521971721 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2522076332 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2541304379 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2599514750 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2735369864 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2739755174 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2763951617 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2769822889 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2898411150 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2898886306 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2904580605 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2911334948 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2920430028 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2964489366 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2982574467 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W2996064600 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W3022051895 @default.
• W3131816492 cites W4294214983 @default.
• W3131816492 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/corr.0000000000001664" @default.
• W3131816492 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/8208442" @default.
• W3131816492 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33626027" @default.
• W3131816492 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
• W3131816492 type Work @default.
• W3131816492 sameAs 3131816492 @default.
• W3131816492 citedByCount "8" @default.
• W3131816492 countsByYear W31318164922021 @default.
• W3131816492 countsByYear W31318164922022 @default.
• W3131816492 countsByYear W31318164922023 @default.
• W3131816492 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3131816492 hasAuthorship W3131816492A5000497890 @default.
• W3131816492 hasAuthorship W3131816492A5033458539 @default.
• W3131816492 hasAuthorship W3131816492A5055651068 @default.
• W3131816492 hasAuthorship W3131816492A5061947579 @default.
• W3131816492 hasAuthorship W3131816492A5086723282 @default.
• W3131816492 hasAuthorship W3131816492A5090051943 @default.
• W3131816492 hasBestOaLocation W31318164921 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C160735492 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C177291462 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C2679804 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C2776035688 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C2776511598 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C2778843546 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C46312422 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C50522688 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C547764534 @default.
• W3131816492 hasConcept C71924100 @default.

• next