ArticleAge and ageing2024
Shared decision-making with older people on TReatment Escalation planning for Acute deterioration in the emergency Medical Setting: a qualitative study of Clinicians' perspectives (STREAMS-C).
Article in Age and ageing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundShared decision-making (SDM) is increasingly expected in healthcare systems prioritising patient autonomy. Treatment escalation plans (TEPs) outline contingency for medical intervention in the event of patient deterioration. This study aimed to understand clinicians' perspectives on SDM in TEP for older patients in the acute medical setting.
methodsThis was a qualitative study following a constructivist approach. Semistructured interviews with vignettes were conducted with 26 consultant and registrar doctors working in emergency medicine, general internal medicine, intensive care medicine and palliative care medicine. Reflexive thematic analysis was performed.
resultsThere were three themes: 'An unequal partnership', 'Options without equipoise' and 'Decisions with shared understanding'. Clinicians' expertise in synthesising complex, uncertain clinical information was contrasted with perceived patient unfamiliarity with future health planning and medical intervention. There was a strong sense of morality underpinning decision-making and little equipoise about appropriate TEP decisions. Communication around the TEP was important, and clinicians sought control over the high-stakes decision whilst avoiding conflict and achieving shared understanding.
conclusionsClinicians take responsibility for securing a 'good' TEP decision for older patients in the acute medical setting. They synthesise clinical data with implicit ethical reasoning according to their professional predictions of qualitative and quantitative success following medical intervention. SDM is seldom considered a priority for this context. Nonetheless, avoidance of conflict, preserving the clinical relationship and shared understanding with the patient and family are important.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.