Search

The article presents the study that explores on the use of haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (SCT) in the treatment of Fanconi anemia (FA) patients in Canada and the U.S. The topics discussed include the attributes of FA, the factors that influenced the decision making of FA patients and family members on SCT, and the benefits and probable risks of SCT.

Background Socioeconomically deprived women are at greater risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Research tends to focus on access of services. Yet access may not equate with the equity of services for women from different socioeconomic backgrounds. Objectives To determine whether pregnant women's perceptions of antenatal provision differed in relation to their socioeconomic deprivation ranking (determined by the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2006). Design A longitudinal, qualitative study with comparative antenatal case studies between January 2007 and April 2009. Setting/Participants Cases were primigravida women from 'least deprived' ( n = 9) and 'most deprived' ( n = 12) geographical areas within one local authority in Scotland. Analysis Data were analysed using case study replication analysis. Results There was little difference in access to antenatal services between the 'least' and 'most' deprived groups. Perception of care differed in relation to the level of 'engagement' (defined using constructs of: language and personalization of care; power and relationships; and health literacy). Engagement was evidenced in most of the 'least deprived' cases and almost none of the 'most deprived' cases. Specifically, socioeconomically deprived women described less evidence of personal connection to their own care, effective communication and the opportunity for shared decision making. Conclusion In women from socioeconomically deprived areas, access may be a less useful indicator than engagement when assessing antenatal service quality. As engagement levels may be one method by which to predict and improve health outcomes, a more equitable antenatal service may need to be developed through the early identification of those women at risk of non-engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context and objective Shared decision making is especially advocated for preference-sensitive decisions. We investigated whether physicians' recommendations pull patients away from their preferred treatment option when making a preference-sensitive decision. Design, participants and methods Inpatients ( N = 102 with schizophrenia, N = 101 with multiple sclerosis) were presented with a hypothetical scenario (the choice between two drugs). They were first asked about their preferences concerning the two drugs and then they received a (fictitious) clinician's recommendation that was contrary to their preferences. Subsequently they made a final choice between the two drugs. Main outcome measures The main outcome measure was whether the patient followed the physician's advice in the hypothetical scenario. Thereby patient's (pre-recommendation) preferences served as a baseline. Results In the decision scenario, about 48% of the patients with schizophrenia and 26% of the patients with multiple sclerosis followed the advice of their physician and thus chose the treatment option that went against their initial preferences. Patients who followed their physician's advice were less satisfied with their decision than patients not following their physician's advice (schizophrenia: t = 2.61, P = 0.01; multiple sclerosis: t = 2.67, P = 0.009). Discussion and conclusions When sharing decisions with patients, physicians should be aware that their advice might influence patients' decisions away from their preferred treatment option. They should encourage their patients to identify their own preferences and help to find the treatment option most consistent with them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]