Do patients prefer optimistic or cautious psychiatrists? An experimental study with new and long-term patients

Abstract Background Patients seeking treatment may be assumed to prefer a psychiatrist who suggests a new treatment with confidence and optimism. Yet, this might not apply uniformly to all patients. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that new patients prefer psychiatrists who present treatments optimistically, whilst patients with longer-term experience of mental health care may rather prefer more cautious psychiatrists. Methods In an experimental study, we produced video-clips of four psychiatrists, each suggesting a pharmacological and a psychological treatment once with optimism and once with caution. 100 \u2018new\u2019 patients with less than 3\ua0months experience of mental health care and 100 \u2018long-term\u2019 patients with more than one year of experience were shown a random selection of one video-clip from each psychiatrist, always including an optimistic and a cautious suggestion of each treatment. Patients rated their preferences for psychiatrists on Likert type scales. Differences in subgroups with different age (18\u201340 vs. 41\u201365 years), gender, school leaving age (\u226416 vs. >16\ua0years), and diagnosis (ICD 10\ua0F2 vs. others) were explored. Results New patients preferred more optimistic treatment suggestions, whilst there was no preference among long-term patients. The interaction effect between preference for treatment presentations and experience of patients was significant (interaction p -value\u2009=\u20090.003). Findings in subgroups were similar. Conclusion In line with the hypothesis, psychiatrists should suggest treatments with optimism to patients with little experience of mental health care. However, this rule does not apply to longer-term patients, who may have experienced treatment failures in the past

The evaluation of a healthcare passport to improve quality of care and communication for people living with dementia (EQuIP): a protocol paper for a qualitative, longitudinal study

Background\ud \ud There is an urgent need for the development of simple communication tools that convey the strengths, assets, and healthcare needs of people living with dementia. A Healthcare Passport may improve communication with range of health and social support services, enhancing quality and continuity of care, and to permit a consideration of the challenges and how these might be managed effectively and compassionately. This study aims to evaluate the acceptability and use of this type of intervention for people living with dementia and their carers.\ud \ud \ud Methods/Design\ud \ud This is a qualitative longitudinal study informed by a critical realist review. The participants will be individuals identified as having mild-moderate dementia and informal carers. The in-depth interviews will occur at three points over the course of 18 months as they use the passport. This will be supplemented by analysis of the content of the passports and information from health and social care providers on the daily practicalities of using the passport in a range of healthcare settings.\ud \ud \ud Discussion\ud \ud By using a critical realist review and a qualitative, longitudinal approach, the study allows for the assessment of a complex intervention in a manner which goes beyond evaluating the basic efficacy of the passport, but looking more deeply at how it worked, for whom, and in what context. It has the potential to develop new data on how interventions improve communication across a range of service providers, while encouraging health and social care professionals to respect and encourage the development of self-management and retention of personhood throughout the progression of life-limiting illnesses

Outcomes associated with matching patients' treatment preferences to physicians' recommendations: study methodology

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patients often express strong preferences for the forms of treatment available for their disease. Incorporating these preferences into the process of treatment decision-making might improve patients' adherence to treatment, contributing to better outcomes. We describe the methodology used in a study aiming to assess treatment outcomes when patients' preferences for treatment are closely matched to recommended treatments.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>Participants included patients with moderate and severe psoriasis attending outpatient dermatology clinics at the University Medical Centre Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Germany. A self-administered online survey used conjoint analysis to measure participants' preferences for psoriasis treatment options at the initial study visit. Physicians' treatment recommendations were abstracted from each participant's medical records. The Preference Matching Index (PMI), a measure of concordance between the participant's preferences for treatment and the physician's recommended treatment, was determined for each participant at t₁(initial study visit). A clinical outcome measure, the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, and two participant-derived outcomes assessing treatment satisfaction and health related quality of life were employed at t₁, t₂(twelve weeks post-t₁) and t₃(twelve weeks post-t₂). Change in outcomes was assessed using repeated measures analysis of variance. The association between participants' PMI scores at t₁and outcomes at t₂and t₃was evaluated using multivariate regressions analysis.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>We describe methods for capturing concordance between patients' treatment preferences and recommended treatment and for assessing its association with specific treatment outcomes. The methods are intended to promote the incorporation of patients' preferences in treatment decision-making, enhance treatment satisfaction, and improve treatment effectiveness through greater adherence.</p

Angiotensinogen M235T gene variants and its association with essential hypertension and plasma renin activity in Malaysian subjects: A case control study

BACKGROUND: Essential hypertension is a major public health concern worldwide where its prevalence accounts for various cerebrovascular diseases. A common molecular variant of angiotensinogen (AGT), the precursor of potent vasoactive hormone angiotensin II, has been incriminated as a marker for genetic predisposition to essential hypertension in some ethnics. This case-control study was designed not only to determine the association of the AGT M235T gene variants with essential hypertension, but also its relationship to Plasma Renin Activity (PRA) in subjects attending the Health Clinic, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. METHODS: The study involved 188 subjects, 101 hypertensives and 87 normotensives. Consents were obtained from all the participated subjects. M235T gene variants were investigated using allele specific polymerase chain reaction and PRA was determined by radioimmunoassay. Hypertensinogenic factors such as dietary habits, physical activity, smoking and drinking habits were assessed using a pre-tested questionnaire. RESULTS: The genotype and allele distribution of the M235T variant differed significantly in hypertensives and normotensives (χ(2 = )23.184, P < 0.001 and χ(2 )= 21.482, P < 0.001, respectively). The odds ratio for hypertension was 1.36 (95% confidence interval 1.03–1.80) for subjects with homozygous mutated allele TT of the M235T variant compared with other genotypes or 1.98 (95% confidence interval 1.46–2.67) for those carrying T allele compared to those carrying M allele. Plasma Renin Activity is also significantly higher in hypertensive subjects (PRA = 3.8 ± 2.5 ngAI/ml/hr for hypertensives, PRA = 2.6 ± 1.3 ngAI/ml/hr for normotensives, P < 0.001), but was not significantly different between groups of genotypes (P = 0.118). CONCLUSION: The M235T variant of the AGT is significantly associated with essential hypertension whereas the genotype TT or allele T is a possible genetic marker or risk factor for hypertension in Malaysian subjects

Experiences of treatment decision making for young people diagnosed with depressive disorders: a qualitative study in primary care and specialist mental health settings

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Clinical guidelines advocate for the inclusion of young people experiencing depression as well as their caregivers in making decisions about their treatment. Little is known, however, about the degree to which these groups are involved, and whether they want to be. This study sought to explore the experiences and desires of young people and their caregivers in relation to being involved in treatment decision making for depressive disorders.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Semi-structured interviews were carried out with ten young people and five caregivers from one primary care and one specialist mental health service about their experiences and beliefs about treatment decision making. Interviews were audio taped, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Experiences of involvement for clients varied and were influenced by clients themselves, clinicians and service settings. For caregivers, experiences of involvement were more homogenous. Desire for involvement varied across clients, and within clients over time; however, most clients wanted to be involved at least some of the time. Both clients and caregivers identified barriers to involvement.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This study supports clinical guidelines that advocate for young people diagnosed with depressive disorders to be involved in treatment decision making. In order to maximise engagement, involvement in treatment decision making should be offered to all clients. Involvement should be negotiated explicitly and repeatedly, as desire for involvement may change over time. Caregiver involvement should be negotiated on an individual basis; however, all caregivers should be supported with information about mental disorders and treatment options.</p

WHO systematic review of prevalence of chronic pelvic pain: a neglected reproductive health morbidity

BACKGROUND: Health care planning for chronic pelvic pain (CPP), an important cause of morbidity amongst women is hampered due to lack of clear collated summaries of its basic epidemiological data. We systematically reviewed worldwide literature on the prevalence of different types of CPP to assess the geographical distribution of data, and to explore sources of variation in its estimates. METHODS: We identified data available from Medline (1966 to 2004), Embase (1980 to 2004), PsycINFO (1887 to 2003), LILACS (1982 to 2004), Science Citation index, CINAHL (January 1980 to 2004) and hand searching of reference lists. Two reviewers extracted data independently, using a piloted form, on participants' characteristics, study quality and rates of CPP. We considered a study to be of high quality (valid) if had at least three of the following features: prospective design, validated measurement tool, adequate sampling method, sample size estimation and response rate >80%. We performed both univariate and multivariate meta-regression analysis to explore heterogeneity of results across studies. RESULTS: There were 178 studies (459975 participants) in 148 articles. Of these, 106 studies were (124259 participants) on dysmenorrhoea, 54 (35973 participants) on dyspareunia and 18 (301756 participants) on noncyclical pain. There were only 19/95 (20%) less developed and 1/45 (2.2%) least developed countries with relevant data in contrast to 22/43 (51.2%) developed countries. Meta-regression analysis showed that rates of pain varied according to study quality features. There were 40 (22.5%) high quality studies with representative samples. Amongst them, the rate of dysmenorrhoea was 16.8 to 81%, that of dyspareunia was 8 to 21.8%, and that for noncyclical pain was 2.1 to 24%. CONCLUSION: There were few valid population based estimates of disease burden due to CPP from less developed countries. The variation in rates of CPP worldwide was due to variable study quality. Where valid data were available, a high disease burden of all types of pelvic pain was found

Discussing Uncertainty and Risk in Primary Care: Recommendations of a Multi-Disciplinary Panel Regarding Communication Around Prostate Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making improves value-concordant decision-making around prostate cancer screening (PrCS). Yet, PrCS discussions remain complex, challenging and often emotional for physicians and average-risk men. OBJECTIVE: In July 2011, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a multidisciplinary expert panel to identify priorities for funding agencies and development groups to promote evidence-based, value-concordant decisions between men at average risk for prostate cancer and their physicians. DESIGN: Two-day multidisciplinary expert panel in Atlanta, Georgia, with structured discussions and formal consensus processes. PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen panelists represented diverse specialties (primary care, medical oncology, urology), disciplines (sociology, communication, medical education, clinical epidemiology) and market sectors (patient advocacy groups, Federal funding agencies, guideline-development organizations). MAIN MEASURES: Panelists used guiding interactional and evaluation models to identify and rate strategies that might improve PrCS discussions and decisions for physicians, patients and health systems/society. Efficacy was defined as the likelihood of each strategy to impact outcomes. Effort was defined as the relative amount of effort to develop, implement and sustain the strategy. Each strategy was rated (1–7 scale; 7 = maximum) using group process software (ThinkTank(TM)). For each group, intervention strategies were grouped as financial/regulatory, educational, communication or attitudinal levers. For each strategy, barriers were identified. KEY RESULTS: Highly ranked strategies to improve value-concordant shared decision-making (SDM) included: changing outpatient clinic visit reimbursement to reward SDM; development of evidence-based, technology-assisted, point-of-service tools for physicians and patients; reframing confusing prostate cancer screening messages; providing pre-visit decision support interventions; utilizing electronic health records to promote benchmarking/best practices; providing additional training for physicians around value-concordant decision-making; and using re-accreditation to promote training. CONCLUSIONS: Conference outcomes present an expert consensus of strategies likely to improve value-concordant prostate cancer screening decisions. In addition, the methodology used to obtain agreement provides a model of successful collaboration around this and future controversial cancer screening issues, which may be of interest to funding agencies, educators and policy makers. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11606-013-2419-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

The Knight of Malta

BACKGROUND: For most women, participation in decision-making during maternity care has a positive impact on their childbirth experiences. Shared decision-making (SDM) is widely advocated as a way to support people in their healthcare choices. The aim of this study was to identify quality criteria and professional competencies for applying shared decision-making in maternity care. We focused on decision-making in everyday maternity care practice for healthy women. METHODS: An international three-round web-based Delphi study was conducted. The Delphi panel included international experts in SDM and in maternity care: mostly midwives, and additionally obstetricians, educators, researchers, policy makers and representatives of care users. Round 1 contained open-ended questions to explore relevant ingredients for SDM in maternity care and to identify the competencies needed for this. In rounds 2 and 3, experts rated statements on quality criteria and competencies on a 1 to 7 Likert-scale. A priori, positive consensus was defined as 70% or more of the experts scoring >/=6 (70% panel agreement). RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 45 quality criteria statements and 4 competency statements. SDM in maternity care is a dynamic process that starts in antenatal care and ends after birth. Experts agreed that the regular visits during pregnancy offer opportunities to build a relationship, anticipate situations and revisit complex decisions. Professionals need to prepare women antenatally for unexpected, urgent decisions in birth and revisit these decisions postnatally. Open and respectful communication between women and care professionals is essential; information needs to be accurate, evidence-based and understandable to women. Experts were divided about the contribution of professional advice in shared decision-making and about the partner's role. CONCLUSIONS: SDM in maternity care is a dynamic process that takes into consideration women's individual needs and the context of the pregnancy or birth. The identified ingredients for good quality SDM will help practitioners to apply SDM in practice and educators to prepare (future) professionals for SDM, contributing to women's positive birth experience and satisfaction with care