Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38883948›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches2024

Is Everyone Beating Around the Bush?: A Qualitative Study Examining the Status of Shared Decision-Making Between Veterans Affairs Providers and Surgical Patients in the ICU.

M Andrew Millis, C Ann Vitous, Cara Ferguson, Maedeh Marzoughi, Erin Kim, Sarah E Bradley, Ashley Duby, Pasithorn A Suwanabol

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

M Andrew MillisFrom the Department of Surgery, Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
C Ann VitousFrom the Department of Surgery, Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Cara FergusonFrom the Department of Surgery, Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Maedeh MarzoughiFrom the Department of Surgery, Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Erin KimFrom the Department of Surgery, Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Sarah E BradleyFrom the Department of Surgery, Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Ashley DubyFrom the Department of Surgery, Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Pasithorn A SuwanabolFrom the Department of Surgery, Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

Funding

AHRQ HHS K08 HS026772
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: We sought to determine if and how providers use elements of shared decision-making (SDM) in the care of surgical patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Background: SDM is the gold standard for decision-making in the ICU. However, it is unknown if this communication style is used in caring for critically ill surgical patients. Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with providers who provide ICU-level care to surgical patients in Veterans Affairs hospitals. Interviews were designed to examine end-of-life care among veterans who have undergone surgery and require ICU-level care. Results: Forty-eight providers across 14 Veterans Affairs hospitals were interviewed. These participants were diverse with respect to age, race, and sex. Participant dialogue was deductively mapped into 8 established SDM components: describing treatment options; determining roles in the decision-making process; fostering partnerships; health care professional preferences; learning about the patient; patient preferences; supporting the decision-making process; and tailoring the information. Within these components, participants shared preferred tools and tactics used to satisfy a given SDM component. Participants also noted numerous barriers to achieving SDM among surgical patients. Conclusions: Providers use elements of SDM when caring for critically ill surgical patients. Additionally, this work identifies facilitators that can be leveraged and barriers that can be addressed to facilitate better communication and decision-making through SDM. These findings are of value for future interventions that seek to enhance SDM among surgical patients both in the ICU and in other settings.

Indexed as

shared decision makingsurgical patientsVeterans

Identifiers

PMID38883948
PMCPMC11175942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.