361 research outputs found

    Стратегії та підходи до реструктуризації підприємств сфери ЖКГ в умовах реформування власності України

    Get PDF
    Наведено результати дослідження існуючих підходів до стратегічних напрямів реструктуризації підприємств сфери ЖКГ в умовах реформування власності. Ключові слова: стратегія реструктуризації, ЖКГ України, реструктуризація підприємства, антикризове управління, стратегічний менеджмент.Приведены результаты исследования существующих подходов в стратегических направлениях реструктуризации предприятий сферы ЖКГ в условиях реформирования собственности. Ключевые слова: стратегия реструктуризации, ЖКХ Украины, реструктуризация предприятия, антикризисное управление, стратегический менеджмент.The paper presents the results of studying the approaches in strategic directions of restructuring of housing and communal enterprises under property reformation in Ukraine. Keywords: strategy of restructuring, housing and communal facilities of Ukraine, restructuring of enterprise, anti-crisis management, strategic management

    Patient-clinician collaboration in making care fit:A qualitative analysis of clinical consultations in diabetes care

    Get PDF
    Objective: To confirm described dimensions of making care fit and explore how patients and clinicians collaborate to make care fit in clinical practice. Methods: As part of an ongoing study, we audiotaped and transcribed patient-clinician consultations in diabetes care. We purposively selected consultations based on participants’ demographical, biomedical and biographical characteristics. We analysed transcripts using reflexive thematic analysis. We combined a deductive and inductive approach, using the pre-described dimensions of making care fit and adding new (sub-)dimensions when pertinent. Results: We analysed 24 clinical consultations. Our data confirmed eight previously described dimensions and provided new sub-dimensions of making care fit with examples from clinical practice (problematic situation, influence of devices, sense of options, shared agenda setting, clinician context, adapting to changing organization of care, and possibility to reconsider). Conclusion: Our study confirmed, specified and enriched the conceptualization of making care fit through practice examples. We observed patient-clinician collaboration in exploration of patients’ context, and by responsively changing, adapting or maintaining care plans. Practice implications: Our findings support clinicians and researchers with insights in important aspects of patient-clinician collaboration. Ultimately, this would lead to optimal design of care plans that fit well in each patient life.</p

    Follow-up of colorectal cancer patients: quality of life and attitudes towards follow-up.

    Get PDF
    The aims of our study were to assess the effect of follow-up on the quality of life of colorectal cancer patients and to assess the attitudes of patients towards follow-up as a function of patient characteristics. Patients who had been treated with curative intent were selected from four types of hospitals. Eighty-two patients were interviewed using a structured questionnaire, whereas 130 patients received the questionnaire by mail. To assess the effect of follow-up on the quality of life, the interviewed patients were randomly allocated to three groups and interviewed at different times in relation to the follow-up visit. Analysis did not show an effect of the follow-up visit on quality of life. Patients reported a positive attitude towards follow-up: it reassured them, they judged the communication with the physician to be positive, and they experienced only slight nervous anticipation and few other disadvantages. Patients reported a strong preference for follow-up, and a large majority would prefer follow-up even if it would not lead to earlier detection of a recurrence. Apart from living situation, no patient characteristics were clearly associated with the attitude towards follow-up. Implications for clinical practice are discussed

    Benefit from preoperative radiotherapy in rectal cancer treatment: disease-free patients' and oncologists' preferences

    Get PDF
    Preoperative radiotherapy (PRT) in resectable rectal cancer improves local control but increases probability of faecal incontinence and sexual dysfunction. Consensus was reached in 2001 in the Netherlands on a guideline advising PRT to new patients. Purpose was to assess at what benefit oncologists and rectal cancer patients prefer PRT followed by surgery to surgery alone, and how oncologists and patients value various treatment outcomes. Sixty-six disease-free patients and 60 oncologists (surgical, radiation, medical) were interviewed. Minimally desired benefit from PRT (local control) was assessed using the Treatment Tradeoff Method. Importance of survival, local control, faecal incontinence, and sexual dysfunction in determining treatment outcome preferences was assessed using Adaptive Conjoint Analysis. The range of required benefit from PRT varied widely within participant groups. Seventeen percent of patients would choose PRT at a 0% benefit; 11% would not choose PRT for the maximum benefit of 11%. Mean minimally desired benefit excluding these two groups was 4%. For oncologists, the required benefit was 5%. Also, how strongly participants valued treatment outcomes varied widely within groups. Of the four outcomes, participants considered incontinence most often as most important. Relative treatment outcome importance differed between specialties. Patients considered sexual functioning more important than oncologists. Large differences in treatment preferences exist between individual patients and oncologists. Oncologists should adequately inform their patients about the risks and benefits of PRT, and elicit patient preferences regarding treatment outcomes

    Shared Decision Making in Health Care Visits for CKD:Patients’ Decisional Role Preferences and Experiences

    Get PDF
    Rationale &amp; Objective: Research on shared decision making (SDM) in chronic kidney disease (CKD) has focused almost exclusively on the modality of kidney replacement treatment. We explored what other CKD decisions are recognized by patients, what their preferences and experiences are regarding these decisions, and how decisions are made during their interactions with medical care professionals. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting &amp; Participants: Patients with CKD receiving (outpatient) care in 1 of 2 Dutch hospitals. Exposure: Patients’ preferred decisional roles for treatment decisions were measured using the Control Preferences Scale survey administered after a health care visit with medical professionals. Outcome: Number of decisions for which patients experienced a decisional role that did or did not match their preferred role. Observed levels of SDM and motivational interviewing in audio recordings of health care visits, measured using the 4-step SDM instrument (4SDM) and Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity coding tools.Analytical Approach: The results were characterized using descriptive statistics, including differences in scores between the patients’ experienced and preferred decisional roles. Results: According to the survey (n = 122) patients with CKD frequently reported decisions regarding planning (112 of 122), medication changes (82 of 122), or lifestyle changes (59 of 122). Of the 357 reported decisions in total, patients preferred that clinicians mostly (125 of 357) or fully (101 of 357) make the decisions. For 116 decisions, they preferred a shared decisional role. For 151 of 357 decisions, the patients’ preferences did not match their experiences. Decisions were experienced as “less shared/patient-directed” (76 of 357) or “more shared/patient-directed” (75 of 357) than preferred. Observed SDM in 118 coded decisions was low (median 4; range, 0 – 22). Motivational interviewing techniques were rarely used. Limitations: Potential recall and selection bias, and limited generalizability. Conclusions: We identified multiple discrepancies between preferred, experienced, and observed SDM in health care visits for CKD. Although patients varied in their preferred decisional role, a large minority of patients expressed a preference for shared decision making for many decisions. However, SDM behavior during the health care visits was observed infrequently. Plain-Language Summary: Shared decision making (SDM) may be a valuable approach for common chronic kidney disease (CKD) decisions, but our knowledge is limited. We collected patient surveys after health care visits for CKD. Patients most frequently experienced decisions regarding planning, medication, and lifestyle. Three decisional roles were preferred by comparable numbers of patients: let the clinician alone decide, let the clinician decide for the most part, or “equally share” the decision. Patients’ experiences of who made the decision did not always match their preferences. In audio recordings of the health care visits, we observed low levels of SDM behavior. These findings suggest that the preference for “sharing decisions” is often unmet for a large number of patients.</p

    Predicting outcomes in chronic kidney disease:needs and preferences of patients and nephrologists

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Guidelines on chronic kidney disease (CKD) recommend that nephrologists use clinical prediction models (CPMs). However, the actual use of CPMs seems limited in clinical practice. We conducted a national survey study to evaluate: 1) to what extent CPMs are used in Dutch CKD practice, 2) patients’ and nephrologists’ needs and preferences regarding predictions in CKD, and 3) determinants that may affect the adoption of CPMs in clinical practice. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with CKD patients to inform the development of two online surveys; one for CKD patients and one for nephrologists. Survey participants were recruited through the Dutch Kidney Patient Association and the Dutch Federation of Nephrology. Results: A total of 126 patients and 50 nephrologists responded to the surveys. Most patients (89%) reported they had discussed predictions with their nephrologists. They most frequently discussed predictions regarded CKD progression: when they were expected to need kidney replacement therapy (KRT) (n = 81), and how rapidly their kidney function was expected to decline (n = 68). Half of the nephrologists (52%) reported to use CPMs in clinical practice, in particular CPMs predicting the risk of cardiovascular disease. Almost all nephrologists (98%) reported discussing expected CKD trajectories with their patients; even those that did not use CPMs (42%). The majority of patients (61%) and nephrologists (84%) chose a CPM predicting when patients would need KRT in the future as the most important prediction. However, a small portion of patients indicated they did not want to be informed on predictions regarding CKD progression at all (10–15%). Nephrologists not using CPMs (42%) reported they did not know CPMs they could use or felt that they had insufficient knowledge regarding CPMs. According to the nephrologists, the most important determinants for the adoption of CPMs in clinical practice were: 1) understandability for patients, 2) integration as standard of care, 3) the clinical relevance. Conclusion: Even though the majority of patients in Dutch CKD practice reported discussing predictions with their nephrologists, CPMs are infrequently used for this purpose. Both patients and nephrologists considered a CPM predicting CKD progression most important to discuss. Increasing awareness about existing CPMs that predict CKD progression may result in increased adoption in clinical practice. When using CPMs regarding CKD progression, nephrologists should ask whether patients want to hear predictions beforehand, since individual patients’ preferences vary.</p

    A Prospective Comparison of Younger and Older Patients' Preferences for Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Hormonal Therapy in Early Breast Cancer

    Get PDF
    AbstractBackgroundIt is unknown what minimal benefit in disease-free survival older patients with breast cancer require from adjuvant systemic therapy, and if this differs from that required by younger patients. We prospectively examined patients' preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy (aCT) and adjuvant hormonal therapy (aHT), factors related to minimally-required benefit, and patients' self-reported motivations.Patients and MethodsFifty-two younger (40-64 years) and 29 older (≥ 65 years) women with a first primary, invasive tumor were interviewed post-surgery, prior to receiving aCT/aHT recommendation.ResultsThe proportions of younger versus older participants who would accept, refuse, or were undecided about therapy were 92% versus 62%, 4% versus 24%, and 4% versus 14% for aCT, and 92% versus 59%, 8% versus 17%, and 0% versus 24% for aHT. The proportion of older participants who would refuse rather than accept aCT was larger than that of younger participants (P = .005). No significant difference was found for aHT (P = .12). Younger and older participants' minimally-required benefit, in terms of additional 10-year disease-free survival, to accept aCT (median, 5% vs. 4%; P = .13) or aHT (median, 10% vs. 8%; P = .15) did not differ. Being single/divorced/widowed (odds ratio [OR], 0.16; P = .005), presence of geriatric condition (inability to perform daily activities, incontinence, severe sensory impairment, depression, polypharmacy, difficulties with walking; OR, 0.27; P = .047), and having a preference to make the treatment decision either alone or after considering the clinician's opinion (active role; OR, 0.15; P = .012) were independently related to requiring larger benefits from aCT. The most frequent motivations for/against therapy included the wish to survive/avoid recurrence, clinician's recommendation, side effects, and treatment duration (only aHT).ConclusionWhereas older participants were less willing to accept aCT than younger participants, no significant difference was found for aHT. However, a majority of older participants would still accept both therapies. Adjuvant systemic therapy should be discussed with eligible patients regardless of age

    'We don't know for sure':discussion of uncertainty concerning multigene panel testing during initial cancer genetic consultations

    Get PDF
    Pre-test counseling about multigene panel testing involves many uncertainties. Ideally, counselees are informed about uncertainties in a way that enables them to make an informed decision about panel testing. It is presently unknown whether and how uncertainty is discussed during initial cancer genetic counseling. We therefore investigated whether and how counselors discuss and address uncertainty, and the extent of shared decision-making (SDM), and explored associations between counselors' communication and their characteristics in consultations on panel testing for cancer. For this purpose, consultations of counselors discussing a multigene panel with a simulated patient were videotaped. Simulated patients represented a counselee who had had multiple cancer types, according to a script. Before and afterwards, counselors completed a survey. Counselors' uncertainty expressions, initiating and the framing of expressions, and their verbal responses to scripted uncertainties of the simulated patient were coded by two researchers independently. Coding was done according to a pre-developed coding scheme using The Observer XT software for observational analysis. Additionally, the degree of SDM was assessed by two observers. Correlation and regression analyses were performed to assess associations of communicated uncertainties, responses and the extent of SDM, with counselors' background characteristics. In total, twenty-nine counselors, including clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, physician assistants-in-training, residents and interns, participated of whom working experience varied between 0 and 25 years. Counselors expressed uncertainties mainly regarding scientific topics (94%) and on their own initiative (95%). Most expressions were framed directly (77%), e.g. We don't know, and were emotionally neutral (59%; without a positive/negative value). Counselors mainly responded to uncertainties of the simulated patient by explicitly referring to the uncertainty (69%), without providing space for further disclosure (66%). More experienced counselors provided less space to further disclose uncertainty (p <0.02), and clinical geneticists scored lower on SDM compared with other types of counselors (p <0.03). Our findings that counselors mainly communicate scientific uncertainties and use space-reducing responses imply that the way counselors address counselees' personal uncertainties and concerns during initial cancer genetic counseling is suboptimal
    corecore