Patient capacity and constraints in the experience of chronic disease: a qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Life and healthcare demand work from patients, more so from patients living with multimorbidity. Patients must respond by mobilizing available abilities and resources, their so-called capacity. We sought to summarize accounts of challenges that reduce patient capacity to access or use healthcare or to enact self-care while carrying out their lives. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and synthesis of the qualitative literature published since 2000 identifying from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Psychinfo, and CINAHL and retrieving selected abstracts for full text assessment for inclusion. After assessing their methodological rigor, we coded their results using a thematic synthesis approach. RESULTS: The 110 reports selected, when synthesized, showed that patient capacity is an accomplishment of interaction with (1) the process of rewriting their biographies and making meaningful lives in the face of chronic condition(s); (2) the mobilization of resources; (3) healthcare and self-care tasks, particularly, the cognitive, emotional, and experiential results of accomplishing these tasks despite competing priorities; (4) their social networks; and (5) their environment, particularly when they encountered kindness or empathy about their condition and a feasible treatment plan. CONCLUSION: Patient capacity is a complex and dynamic construct that exceeds "resources" alone. Additional work needs to translate this emerging theory into useful practice for which we propose a clinical mnemonic (BREWS) and the ICAN Discussion Aid

FUERA DEL CANON

El artículo comienza con una definición del canon y con una consideración sobre cómo se establece. Luego, habla de algunos escritores canónicos de Centro América, como Sergio Ramírez o Gioconda Belli. Después, se refieren a escritores “fuera del canon”: la poesía feminista, la generación “x”, el grupo de Marco Antonio Flores, la literatura escrita por mujeres, la escrita por indígenas, la literatura póstuma. Al final, trata de establecer características generales, estilo, temas y motivos

A systematic review of shared decision making interventions in chronic conditions: a review protocol

Background: Chronic conditions are a major source of morbidity, mortality and cost worldwide. Shared decision making is one way to improve care for patients with chronic conditions. Although it has been widely studied, the effect of shared decision making in the context of chronic conditions is unknown. Methods/Design: We will perform a systematic review with the objective of determining the effectiveness of shared decision making interventions for persons diagnosed with chronic conditions. We will search the following databases for relevant articles: PubMed, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid EBM Reviews CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Ovid PsycInfo. We will also search clinical trial registries and contact experts in the field to identify additional studies. We will include randomized controlled trials studying shared decision making interventions in patients with chronic conditions who are facing an actual decision. Shared decision making interventions will be defined as any intervention aiming to facilitate or improve patient and/or clinician engagement in a decision making process. We will describe all studies and assess their quality. After adjusting for missing data, we will analyze the effect of shared decision making interventions on outcomes in chronic conditions overall and stratified by condition. We will evaluate outcomes according to an importance ranking informed by a variety of stakeholders. We will perform several exploratory analyses including the effect of author contact on the estimates of effect. Discussion: We anticipate that this systematic review may have some limitations such as heterogeneity and imprecision; however, the results will contribute to improving the quality of care for individuals with chronic conditions and facilitate a process that allows decision making that is most consistent with their own values and preferences

Toma de decisiones compartidas y medicina mínimamente impertinente en el manejo de las enfermedades crónicas

Chronic diseases are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. These conditions require considerable time investment and resources from the health system in Peru, as well as from patients and their families. Paradoxically, the developed medical strategies for managing these conditions generate a constant and increasing burden for the patient and their environment, which affects quality of life and therapeutic results. In this article, the role of shared decision making and minimal disruptive medicine will be described as strategies to address these problems.Las enfermedades crónicas son la causa más importante de morbilidad y mortalidad a nivel mundial. Estas condiciones requieren considerable inversión de tiempo y recursos por parte del sistema de salud en el Perú, así como de los pacientes y sus familiares. Paradójicamente, las estrategias médicas desarrolladas para el manejo de estas condiciones generan una carga constante y creciente para el paciente y su entorno, que repercute en la calidad de vida del paciente y en los resultados terapéuticos. En este artículo describimos el rol de la toma de decisiones compartidas y de la medicina mínimamente impertinente como estrategias para abordar estos problemas

Toma de decisiones compartidas y medicina mínimamente impertinente en el manejo de las enfermedades crónicas

Las enfermedades crónicas son la causa más importante de morbilidad y mortalidad a nivel mundial. Estas condiciones requieren considerable inversión de tiempo y recursos por parte del sistema de salud en el Perú, así como de los pacientes y sus familiares. Paradójicamente, las estrategias médicas desarrolladas para el manejo de estas condiciones generan una carga constante y creciente para el paciente y su entorno, que repercute en la calidad de vida del paciente y en los resultados terapéuticos. En este artículo describimos el rol de la toma de decisiones compartidas y de la medicina mínimamente impertinente como estrategias para abordar estos problema

Toma de decisiones compartidas y medicina mínimamente impertinente en el manejo de las enfermedades crónicas

Las enfermedades crónicas son la causa más importante de morbilidad y mortalidad a nivel mundial. Estas condiciones requieren considerable inversión de tiempo y recursos por parte del sistema de salud en el Perú, así como de los pacientes y sus familiares. Paradójicamente, las estrategias médicas desarrolladas para el manejo de estas condiciones generan una carga constante y creciente para el paciente y su entorno, que repercute en la calidad de vida del paciente y en los resultados terapéuticos. En este artículo describimos el rol de la toma de decisiones compartidas y de la medicina mínimamente impertinente como estrategias para abordar estos problema

Perspectives, Decision Making, and Final Mode of Delivery in Pregnant Women With a Previous C-Section in a General Hospital in Peru: Prospective Analysis

Objective: Explore the perspectives, decision-making process, and final mode of delivery among pregnant women with a previous C-section (Cesarean section) in a general public sector hospital in Lima, Peru. Methods: A qualitative prospective study using semistructured interviews at two time points in the outpatient obstetrics and gynecology clinic of a public sector, university-affiliated reference hospital in Lima, Peru. Seventeen adult pregnant women with a prior C-section who were deemed by their attending obstetrician to be candidates for a trial of labor were interviewed. The first interview was between 37 and 38 weeks of pregnancy, and the second interview was 24 to 48 hours after delivery. Main outcome measures: Predelivery decision-making process and final mode of delivery. Results: Among the 17 participants, about half (9) of the participants stated that the physician explained that they had two approaches for delivery, a trial of labor after C-section (TOLAC) or elective repeated C-section (ERCD). Two women stated that their respective providers explained only one option, either an ERCD or TOLAC. However, 6 women did not receive any information from their providers about their delivery options. Of the 10 participants that decided TOLAC, 8 ended up having a C-section, and of the 7 patients that had planned an ERCD, 1 ended up having a vaginal delivery. Conclusion: Many participants affirmed that they made the decision about their approach of delivery. However, most of the participants that decided a TOLAC ended up having a C-section because of complications during the final weeks of pregnancy or during labor

Shared decision making for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common ongoing health problem that places patients at risk of stroke. Whether and how a patient addresses this risk depends on each patient’s goals, context, and values. Consequently, leading cardiovascular societies recommend using shared decision making (SDM) to individualize antithrombotic treatment in patients with AF. The aim of this study is to assess the extent to which the Anticoagulation Choice conversation tool promotes high-quality SDM and influences anticoagulation uptake and adherence in patients with AF at risk of strokes. Methods This study protocol describes a multicenter, encounter-level, randomized trial to assess the effect of using the Anticoagulation Choice conversation tool in the clinical encounter, compared to usual care. The participating centers include an academic hospital system, a suburban community group practice, and an urban safety net hospital, all in Minnesota, USA. Patients with ongoing nonvalvular AF at risk of strokes (CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 1 in men, or ≥ 2 in women) will be eligible for participation. We aim to include 999 patients and their clinicians. The primary outcome is the quality of SDM as perceived by participants, and as assessed by a post-encounter survey that ascertains (a) knowledge transfer, (b) concordance of the decision made, (c) quality of communication, and (d) satisfaction with the decision-making process. Recordings of encounters will be reviewed to assess the extent of patient involvement and how participants use the tool (fidelity). Anticoagulant use, choice of agent, and adherence will be drawn from patients’ medical and pharmacy records. Strokes and bleeding events will be drawn from patient records. Discussion This study will provide a valid and precise measure of the effect of the Anticoagulation Choice conversation tool on SDM quality and processes, and on the treatment choices and adherence to therapy among AF patients at risk of stroke. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02905032 . Registered on 9 September 2016

Does the duration of ambulatory consultations affect the quality of healthcare? A systematic review

BackgroundThe objective is to examine and synthesise the best available experimental evidence about the effect of ambulatory consultation duration on quality of healthcare.MethodsWe included experimental studies manipulating the length of outpatient clinical encounters between adult patients and clinicians (ie, therapists, pharmacists, nurses, physicians) to determine their effect on quality of care (ie, effectiveness, efficiency, timeliness, safety, equity, patient-centredness and patient satisfaction).Information sourcesUsing controlled vocabulary and keywords, without restriction by language or year of publication, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews and Scopus from inception until 15 May 2023.Risk of biasCochrane Risk of Bias instrument.Data synthesisNarrative synthesis.Results11 publications of 10 studies explored the relationship between encounter duration and quality. Most took place in the UK's general practice over two decades ago. Study findings based on very sparse and outdated evidence-which suggested that longer consultations improved indicators of patient-centred care, education about prevention and clinical referrals; and that consultation duration was inconsistently related to patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes-warrant low confidence due to limited protections against bias and indirect applicability to current practice.ConclusionExperimental evidence for a minimal or optimal duration of an outpatient consultation is sparse and outdated. To develop evidence-based policies and practices about encounter length, randomised trials of different consultation lengths-in person and virtually, and with electronic health records-are needed.Trial registration numberOSF Registration DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/EUDK8