Patient Preferences and Decision Making Discussion

Changes in culture and technology have resulted in patient populations that are often well informed and educated, even before consulting or considering a healthcare need delivered by a health professional. Fueled by this, health professionals are increasingly involving patients in treatment decisions. However, this often comes with challenges, as illnesses and treatments can become complex.

ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED SOLUTION PAPERS

 

What has your experience been with patient involvement in treatment or healthcare decisions?

In this Discussion, you will share your experiences and consider the impact of patient involvement (or lack of involvement). You will also consider the use of a patient decision aid to inform best practices for patient care and healthcare decision making.

To Prepare:

• Review the Resources and reflect on a time when you experienced a patient being brought into (or not being brought into) a decision regarding their treatment plan.
• Review the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute’s Decision Aids Inventory at https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/.
  • Choose “For Specific Conditions,” then Browse an alphabetical listing of decision aids by health topic.

NOTE: To ensure compliance with HIPAA rules, please DO NOT use the patient’s real name or any information that might identify the patient or organization/practice.

RESOURCES:

Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer.

• Chapter 7, “Patient Concerns, Choices and Clinical Judgement in Evidence-Based Practice” (pp. 219–232)

Hoffman, T. C., Montori, V. M., & Del Mar, C. (2014). The connection between evidence-based medicine and shared decision making. Journal of the American Medical Association, 312(13), 1295–1296. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.10186

Kon, A. A., Davidson, J. E., Morrison, W., Danis, M., & White, D. B. (2016). Shared decision making in intensive care units: An American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society policy statement. Critical Care Medicine, 44(1), 188–201. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000001396

Opperman, C., Liebig, D., Bowling, J., & Johnson, C. S., & Harper, M. (2016). Measuring return on investment for professional development activities: Implications for practice. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 32(4), 176–184. doi:10.1097/NND.0000000000000483

Schroy, P. C., Mylvaganam, S., & Davidson, P. (2014). Provider perspectives on the utility of a colorectal cancer screening decision aid for facilitating shared decision making. Health Expectations, 17(1), 27–35. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00730.x

https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/

Week08_Discussion_Rubric

Excellent 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.Good 40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.Supported by at least three credible sources.Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.Fair 35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.Post is cited with two credible sources.Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.Contains some APA formatting errors.Poor 0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.Contains only one or no credible sources.Not written clearly or concisely.Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.