Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29401211›Full record

Observational studyJournal of hospital medicine2018

Shared Decision-Making During Inpatient Rounds: Opportunities for Improvement in Patient Engagement and Communication.

Rebecca Blankenburg, Joan F Hilton, Patrick Yuan, Stephanie Rennke, Brad Monash, Stephanie M Harman, Debbie S Sakai, Poonam Hosamani, Adeena Khan, Ian Chua and 3 more

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of hospital medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Barriers and facilitators for shared decision-making in oncology inpatient practice: an explorative study of the healthcare providers' perspective.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Promoting Shared Decision-Making Behaviors During Inpatient Rounds: A Multimodal Educational Intervention.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Rebecca BlankenburgDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA. rblanke@stanford.edu.
Joan F HiltonDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Patrick YuanDepartment of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Stephanie RennkeDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Brad MonashDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, and Division of Hospital Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Stephanie M HarmanDivision of Primary Care and Population Health, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Debbie S SakaiDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Poonam HosamaniDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Adeena KhanDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Ian ChuaDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Eric HuynhDepartment of Medicine, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Lisa ShiehDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Lijia XieMedicine Residency Program, Department of Medicine, Stanford School of Medicine, USA.

Funding

Collaborative Advances in Clinical Health Education (CACHE)R25AT006573 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI HARMAN, STEPHANIE, SATTERFIELD, JASON M · 2011 to 2015
$1.2M
NCCIH NIH HHS R25 AT006573
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShared decision-making (SDM) improves patient engagement and may improve outpatient health outcomes. Little is known about inpatient SDM.

objectiveTo assess overall quality, provider behaviors, and contextual predictors of SDM during inpatient rounds on medicine and pediatrics hospitalist services.

designA 12-week, cross-sectional, single-blinded observational study of team SDM behaviors during rounds, followed by semistructured patient interviews.

settingTwo large quaternary care academic medical centers.

participantsThirty-five inpatient teams (18 medicine, 17 pediatrics) and 254 unique patient encounters (117 medicine, 137 pediatrics).

interventionObservational study. MEASUREMENTS: We used a 9-item Rochester Participatory Decision-Making Scale (RPAD) measured team-level SDM behaviors. Same-day interviews using a modified RPAD assessed patient perceptions of SDM.

resultsCharacteristics associated with increased SDM in the multivariate analysis included the following: service, patient gender, timing of rounds during patient's hospital stay, and amount of time rounding per patient (P < .05). The most frequently observed behaviors across all services included explaining the clinical issue and matching medical language to the patient's level of understanding. The least frequently observed behaviors included checking understanding of the patient's point of view, examining barriers to follow-through, and asking if the patient has any questions. Patients and guardians had substantially higher ratings for SDM quality compared to peer observers (7.2 vs 4.4 out of 9).

conclusionsImportant opportunities exist to improve inpatient SDM. Team size, number of learners, patient census, and type of decision being made did not affect SDM, suggesting that even large, busy services can perform SDM if properly trained.

Indexed as

CommunicationDecision MakingPatient ParticipationTeaching RoundsAcademic Medical CentersCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInpatientsInternal MedicineInterviews as TopicMalePatient Care TeamPediatrics

Identifiers

PMID29401211
PMCPMC6392000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.