Search

Background: A relational approach to autonomy refers to the way in which social conditions and relationships shape a person's self-identity and capacity in decision-making. This article provides an empirical account of how treatment choices for women undergoing breast diseases care are fostered within the dynamics of their relationships with clinicians, family members, and other aspects of their social environment., Methods: This qualitative study recruited ten women undergoing treatment at a breast programme, and eight clinicians supporting their care, in a private teaching hospital in New South Wales, Australia. Fourteen patient-clinician consultation observations and 17 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Schema analysis of interview transcripts were undertaken by a team of researchers and corroborated by observational fieldnotes., Results: Relational identities of patients influenced the rationale for treatment decision-making. Patients drew on supportive resources from family and medical advice from clinicians to progress with treatment goals. While clinicians held much social power over patients as the medical experts, patients highlighted the need for clinicians to earn their trust through demonstrated professionalism. Information exchange created a communicative space for clinicians and patients to negotiate shared values, promoting greater patient ownership of treatment decisions. As treatment progressed, patients' personal experiences of illness and treatment became a source of self-reflection, with a transformative impact on self-confidence and assertiveness., Conclusion: Patients' confidence and self-trust can be fostered by opportunities for communicative engagement and self-reflection over the course of treatment in breast disease, and better integration of their self-identity and social values in treatment decisions.

Introduction: Motor neuron disease (MND) is a terminal, progressive, multisystem disorder. Well-timed decisions are key to effective symptom management. To date, there are few published decision support tools, also known as decision aids, to guide patients in making ongoing choices for symptom management and quality of life. This protocol is to develop and validate decision support tools for patients and families to use in conjunction with health professionals in MND multidisciplinary care. The tools will inform patients and families of the benefits and risks of each option, as well as the consequences of accepting or declining treatment., Methods and Analysis: The study is being conducted from June 2015 to May 2016, using a modified Delphi process. A 2-stage, 7-step process will be used to develop the tools, based on existing literature and stakeholder feedback. The first stage will be to develop the decision support tools, while the second stage will be to validate both the tools and the process used to develop them. Participants will form expert panels, to provide feedback on which the development and validation of the tools will be based. Participants will be drawn from patients with MND, family carers and health professionals, support association workers, peak body representatives, and MND and patient decision-making researchers., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval for the study has been granted by Macquarie University Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC), approval number 5201500658. Knowledge translation will be conducted via publications, seminar and conference presentations to patients and families, health professionals and researchers., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Background: Patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) face numerous decisions for symptom management and quality of life. Models of decision making in chronic disease and cancer care are insufficient for the complex and changing needs of patients with ALS ., Objective: The aim was to examine the question: how can decision making that is both effective and patient-centred be enacted in ALS multidisciplinary care?, Setting and Participants: Fifty-four respondents (32 health professionals, 14 patients and eight carers) from two specialized ALS multidisciplinary clinics participated in semi-structured interviews. Interviews were transcribed, coded and analysed thematically., Results: Comparison of stakeholder perspectives revealed six key themes of ALS decision making. These were the decision-making process; patient-centred focus; timing and planning; information sources; engagement with specialized ALS services; and access to non-specialized services. A model, embedded in the specialized ALS multidisciplinary clinic, was derived to guide patient decision making. The model is cyclic, with four stages: 'Participant Engagement'; 'Option Information'; 'Option Deliberation'; and 'Decision Implementation'., Discussion: Effective and patient-centred decision making is enhanced by the structure of the specialized ALS clinic, which promotes patients' symptom management and quality of life goals. However, patient and carer engagement in ALS decision making is tested by the dynamic nature of ALS, and patient and family distress. Our model optimizes patient-centred decision making, by incorporating patients' cyclic decision-making patterns and facilitating carer inclusion in decision processes., Conclusions: The model captures the complexities of patient-centred decision making in ALS. The framework can assist patients and carers, health professionals, researchers and policymakers in this challenging disease environment., (© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

There is a need to improve the efficiency of return on research investment and the translation of knowledge into daily practice. Research with end users within a context that concentrates on moving findings into practice settings--that is, translational health systems research (HSR)--is required. This type of research is well suited to tackle multifaceted, nonlinear issues, including those presented in complex, distributed, networked systems. Nevertheless, HSR knowledge management transfer is problematic, as the issues are complex and the evidence base is broad and often disputed due to local variables. To overcome these challenges, collaborative translational HSR is advocated. Likewise, meeting the demand for health professionals with collaborative translational HSR skills and competencies requires knowledge provision with practical tools. We present a study resource--the SCOPE Toolkit (references, HSR LEVELS figure, and the HSR SCOPE tool)--to help health professionals and researchers undertake collaborative translational HSR projects. The study resource addresses the focus, outcomes and implications for practice. The Toolkit can be used by those at all levels of experience, across industry and academic settings, and for learning purposes to successfully conceptualize and implement a collaborative translational HSR project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies on the experiences of consumers with Motor Neurone Disease Associations at end of life and bereavement are lacking, and their role and capability within the broader sectors of health and disability are unknown. Objectives: To ascertain the experiences and views of bereaved motor neurone disease caregivers with Motor Neurone Disease Associations about service gaps and needed improvements before and during bereavement and to propose a model of care that fits with consumer preferences and where Motor Neurone Disease Associations are effective enablers of care. Methods: A national bereavement survey was facilitated in 2019 by all Motor Neurone Disease Associations in Australia. A total of 363 respondents completed the section on support provided by Motor Neurone Disease Associations. A mixed-method design was used. Results: Respondents were generally positive about support received before bereavement (73-76%), except for emotional support (55%). Positive experiences related to the following: information, equipment advice/provision, advocacy/linking to services, showing empathy/understanding, personal contact and peer social support. Negative experiences included lack of continuity in case management and contact, perceived lack of competence or training, lack of emotional support and a lack of access to motor neurone disease services in rural areas. Suggested improvements were as follows: more contact and compassion at end of life and postdeath; better preparation for end of life; option of discussing euthanasia; providing referrals and links for counseling; access to caregiver support groups and peer interaction; provision of a genuine continuum of care rather than postdeath abandonment; guidance regarding postdeath practicalities; and more access to bereavement support in rural areas. Conclusion: This study provides consumer perspectives on driving new or improved initiatives by Motor Neurone Disease Associations and the need for a national standardised approach to training and service delivery, based on research evidence. A public health approach to motor neurone disease end-of-life care, of international applicability, is proposed to address the needs and preferences of motor neurone disease consumers, while supporting the capability of Motor Neurone Disease Associations within a multidisciplinary workforce to deliver that care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease, leading to death within an average of 2-3 years. A cure is yet to be found, and a single diseasemodifying treatment has had a modest effect in slowing disease progression. Specialized multidisciplinary ALS care has been shown to extend survival and improve patients' quality of life, by providing coordinated interprofessional care that seeks to address the complex needs of this patient group. This review examines the nature of specialized multidisciplinary care in ALS and draws on a broad range of evidence that has shaped current practice. The authors explain how multidisciplinary ALS care is delivered. The existing models of care, the role of palliative care within multidisciplinary ALS care, and the costs of formal and informal care are examined. Critical issues of ALS care are then discussed in the context of the support rendered by multidisciplinary-based care. The authors situate the patient and family as key stakeholders and decision makers in the multidisciplinary care network. Finally, the current challenges to the delivery of coordinated interprofessional care in ALS are explored, and the future of coordinated interprofessional care for people with ALS and their family caregivers is considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this study was to explore clinician perspectives on patient decision-making in multidisciplinary care for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), in an attempt to identify factors influencing decision-making. Methods: Thirty-two health professionals from two specialized multidisciplinary ALS clinics participated in individual and group interviews. Participants came from allied health, medical, and nursing backgrounds. Interviews were audio recorded, and the transcripts were analyzed thematically. Results: Respondents identified barriers and facilitators to optimal timing and quality of decision-making. Barriers related to the patient and the health system. Patient barriers included difficulties accepting the diagnosis, information sources, and the patient-carer relationship. System barriers were timing of diagnosis and symptom management services, access to ALS-specific resources, and interprofessional communication. Facilitators were teamwork approaches, supported by effective communication and evidence-based information. Conclusion: Patient-centered and collaborative decision-making is influenced by a range of factors that inhibit the delivery of optimal care. Decision-making relies on a fine balance between timing of information and service provision, and the readiness of patients to receive them. Health system restrictions impacted on optimal timing, and patients coming to terms with their condition. Clinicians valued proactive decision-making to prepare patients and families for inevitable change. The findings indicate disparity between patient choices and clinician perceptions of evidence, knowledge, and experience. To improve multidisciplinary ALS practice, and ultimately patient care, further work is required to bridge this gap in perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]