Search

This study aimed to enhance understanding of the dimensions of accountability captured and not captured in acute care hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Based on an Ontario-wide survey and follow-up interviews with three acute care hospitals in the Greater Toronto Area, we found that the two dominant dimensions of hospital accountability being reported are financial and quality performance. These two dimensions drove both internal and external reporting. Hospitals' internal reports typically included performance measures that were required or mandated in external reports. Although respondents saw reporting as a valuable mechanism for hospitals and the health system to monitor and track progress against desired outcomes, multiple challenges with current reporting requirements were communicated, including the following: 58% of survey respondents indicated that performance-reporting resources were insufficient; manual data capture and performance reporting were prevalent, with the majority of hospitals lacking sophisticated tools or technology to effectively capture, analyze and report performance data; hospitals tended to focus on those processes and outcomes with high measurability; and 53% of respondents indicated that valuable cross-system accountability, performance measures or both were not captured by current reporting requirements., (Copyright © 2014 Longwoods Publishing.)

Background: What role do people want to play in treatment decision-making (DM)?, Objective: Examine the role patients indicate they would prefer in making treatment decisions across multiple clinical settings in Ontario, Canada., Design: Secondary analysis of a series of survey/interview-based studies measuring preferred role, conducted in 12 different populations., Setting and Participants: Respondents were outpatients, largely but not entirely attending outpatient clinics in large teaching hospitals in urban settings in the Province of Ontario, Canada. The subgroups and sample sizes were: breast cancer (202), prostate disease (202), fractures (202), continence (46), orthopaedic (111), rheumatology (56), multiple sclerosis (22), HIV/AIDS (431), infertility (454), benign prostatic hyperplasia (678) and cardiac disease (300), plus 50 healthy nursing students (for scale validation)., Measurements: All studies categorized preferred role using the Problem-Solving Decision-Making (PSDM) scale with one or both of the Current Health condition and Chest Pain vignettes., Results: Few respondents preferred an autonomous role (1.2% for the current health condition vignette and 0.7% for the chest pain vignette); most preferred shared DM (77.8% current health condition; 65.1% chest pain) or a passive role (20.3% current health condition; 34.1% chest pain). Familiarity with a clinical condition increases desire for a shared (as opposed to passive) role. Preferences for passive vs. shared roles varied across settings; older and less educated individuals were most likely to prefer passive roles., Conclusions: Despite consumerist rhetoric among some bioethicists, very few respondents wish an autonomous role. Most wish to share DM with their providers.

Objective: To clarify preferred labels for people receiving health care., Background: The proper label to describe people receiving care has evoked considerable debate among providers and bio-ethicists, but there is little evidence as to the preferences of the people involved., Design: We analysed dictionary definitions as to the derivation and connotations of such potential labels as: patient, client, customer, consumer, partner and survivor. We then surveyed outpatients from four clinical populations in Ontario, Canada about their feelings about these labels., Setting and Participants: People from breast cancer (n = 202), prostate disease (n = 202) and fracture (n = 202) clinics in an urban Canadian teaching hospital (Sharpe study), and people with HIV/AIDS at 10 specialty care clinics and three primary care practices affiliated with the HIV Ontario Observational Database (n = 431). VARIABLES AND OUTCOME MEASURES: The survey instruments included questions about opinion of label, role in treatment decision-making (the Problem Solving Decision Making scale), trust, use of information and health status., Results: Our respondents moderately liked the label 'patient'. The other alternatives evoked moderate to strong dislike., Conclusions: Many alternatives to 'patient' incorporate assumptions (e.g. a market relationship) which care recipients may also find objectionable. People who are receiving care find the label 'patient' much less objectionable than the alternatives that have been suggested.

Objective: Does trust in physicians aid or hinder patient autonomy? We examine the relationship between trust in the recipient's doctor, and desire for a participative role in decisions about medical treatment., Design: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in an urban Canadian teaching hospital., Setting and Participants: A total of 606 respondents in three clinics (breast cancer, prostate cancer, fracture) completed questionnaires., Variables Studied: The instrument included the Problem Solving Decision Making (PSDM) Scale, which used two vignettes (current health condition, chest pain) to categorize respondents by preferred role, and the Trust-in-Physician Scale., Results: Few respondents preferred an autonomous role (2.9% for the current health condition vignette and 1.2% for the chest pain vignette); most preferred shared decision-making (DM) (67.3% current health condition; 48.7% chest pain) or a passive role (29.6% current health condition; 50.1% chest pain). Trust-in-physician yielded 6.3% with blind trust, 36.1% with high trust, 48.6% moderate trust and 9.0% low trust. As hypothesized, autonomous patients had relatively low levels of trust, passive respondents were more likely to have blind trust, while shared respondents had high but not excessive trust. Trust had a significant influence on preferred role even after controlling for the demographic factors such as sex, age and education., Conclusions: Very few respondents wish an autonomous role; those who do tend to have lower trust in their providers. Familiarity with a clinical condition increases desire for a shared (as opposed to passive) role. Shared DM often accompanies, and may require, a trusting patient-physician relationship.

A review of family physician-assisted smoking cessation research indicates that the family practice setting affords an excellent opportunity to intervene with a large proportion of smokers, at a time when they are receptive to health promotion messages. Outcome data at 6- and 12-month follow-up intervals indicate the value of combining 3 key strategies in achieving optimal results: physician advice and support, nicotine replacement therapy, and cognitive-behavioural counselling. The authors' review identifies questions that need to be addressed in future research: How can barriers to program delivery be overcome in the family practice setting? What is the best way to ensure optimal integration of the 3 key strategies? Which follow-up intervals are appropriate (e.g., 6 months, 12 months, 18 months) given the finding that relapse is common and that most smokers make several quit attempts before stopping for good?

Background: Although current ideology suggests patients should be active participants in decision making about their care, the literature suggests that patients wish to be informed but not involved., Objective: To test the hypothesis that most patients want their physicians to take the responsibility for problem solving (PS, identifying the one right answer), but that many want to be involved in decision-making (DM, selecting the most desired bundle of outcomes) tasks., Methods: Survey responses from 300 patients undergoing angiogram at a Toronto, Ontario, hospital were analyzed (response rate, 72%). Survey items included scales to measure desire for information and participation, including Autonomy Preference Index, the Krantz Health Opinion Survey, and the Deber-Kraetschmer Problem-Solving Decision-Making Scale measured on a scale from, 1 (doctor only) to 5 (patient only)., Results: Patients had a relatively high desire for information. On the Problem-Solving Decision-Making Scale, they overwhelmingly wished the PS tasks to be performed by or shared with the physician (98.4% of the 12 PS scores are between 1 and 3), but wanted to be involved in DM (78% of the 6 DM scores are between 3 and 5). Preference for handing over control to the physician was significantly greater for the vignette involving potential mortality (chest pain) than for the vignettes involving mainly morbidity (urinary problems) or quality of life (fertility)., Conclusions: Although patients do not wish to be involved in PS tasks, few wish to hand over DM control to their physician. These findings suggest 2 major roles for clinicians--assisting patients in PS to structure choices and supporting them in making often difficult decisions.