Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Understanding how and under what circumstances decision coaching works for people making healthcare decisions: a realist review.
Zhao, Junqiang; Jull, Janet; Finderup, Jeanette; Smith, Maureen; Kienlin, Simone Maria; Rahn, Anne Christin; Dunn, Sandra; Aoki, Yumi; Brown, Leanne; Harvey, Gillian; Stacey, Dawn.
Afiliación
  • Zhao J; School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
  • Jull J; School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, Canada.
  • Finderup J; Department of Renal Medicine, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
  • Smith M; Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
  • Kienlin SM; Research Centre for Patient Involvement, Aarhus University & Central Region Denmark, Aarhus, Denmark.
  • Rahn AC; Cochrane Consumer Network Executive, Ottawa, Canada.
  • Dunn S; Department of Health and Caring Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Langnes, Norway.
  • Aoki Y; Department of Medicine and Healthcare, The South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority, Hamar, Norway.
  • Brown L; Nursing Research Unit, Institute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
  • Harvey G; School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
  • Stacey D; BORN Ontario, Ottawa, Canada.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak ; 22(1): 265, 2022 10 08.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36209086
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Decision coaching is non-directive support delivered by a trained healthcare provider to help people prepare to actively participate in making healthcare decisions. This study aimed to understand how and under what circumstances decision coaching works for people making healthcare decisions.

METHODS:

We followed the realist review methodology for this study. This study was built on a Cochrane systematic review of the effectiveness of decision coaching interventions for people facing healthcare decisions. It involved six iterative

steps:

(1) develop the initial program theory; (2) search for evidence; (3) select, appraise, and prioritize studies; (4) extract and organize data; (5) synthesize evidence; and (6) consult stakeholders and draw conclusions.

RESULTS:

We developed an initial program theory based on decision coaching theories and stakeholder feedback. Of the 2594 citations screened, we prioritized 27 papers for synthesis based on their relevance rating. To refine the program theory, we identified 12 context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations. Essential mechanisms for decision coaching to be initiated include decision coaches', patients', and clinicians' commitments to patients' involvement in decision making and decision coaches' knowledge and skills (four CMOs). CMOs during decision coaching are related to the patient (i.e., willing to confide, perceiving their decisional needs are recognized, acquiring knowledge, feeling supported), and the patient-decision coach interaction (i.e., exchanging information, sharing a common understanding of patient's values) (five CMOs). After decision coaching, the patient's progress in making or implementing a values-based preferred decision can be facilitated by the decision coach's advocacy for the patient, and the patient's deliberation upon options (two CMOs). Leadership support enables decision coaches to have access to essential resources to fulfill their role (one CMOs).

DISCUSSION:

In the refined program theory, decision coaching works when there is strong leadership support and commitment from decision coaches, clinicians, and patients. Decision coaches need to be capable in coaching, encourage patients' participation, build a trusting relationship with patients, and act as a liaison between patients and clinicians to facilitate patients' progress in making or implementing an informed values-based preferred option. More empirical studies, especially qualitative and process evaluation studies, are needed to further refine the program theory.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Tutoría Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Asunto de la revista: INFORMATICA MEDICA Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Canadá

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Tutoría Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Asunto de la revista: INFORMATICA MEDICA Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Canadá