Shared decision-making during surgical consultation for gallstones at a safety-net hospital

Krislynn M. Mueck, Isabel M. Leal, Charlie C. Wan, Braden F. Goldberg, Tamara E. Saunders, Stefanos G. Millas, Mike K. Liang, Tien C. Ko, Lillian S. Kao

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Understanding patient perspectives regarding shared decision-making is crucial to providing informed, patient-centered care. Little is known about perceptions of vulnerable patients regarding shared decision-making during surgical consultation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a validated tool reflects perceptions of shared decision-making accurately among patients seeking surgical consultation for gallstones at a safety-net hospital. Methods: A mixed methods study was conducted in a sample of adult patients with gallstones evaluated at a safety-net surgery clinic between May to July 2016. Semi-structured interviews were conducted after their initial surgical consultation and analyzed for emerging themes. Patients were administered the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire and Autonomy Preference Scale. Univariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with shared decision-making and to compare the results of the surveys to those of the interviews. Results: The majority of patients (N = 30) were female (90%), Hispanic (80%), Spanish-speaking (70%), and middle-aged (45.7 ± 16 years). The proportion of patients who perceived shared decision-making was greater in the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire versus the interviews (83% vs 27%, P <.01). Age, sex, race/ethnicity, primary language, diagnosis, Autonomy Preference Scale score, and decision for operation was not associated with shared decision-making. Contributory factors to this discordance include patient unfamiliarity with shared decision-making, deference to surgeon authority, lack of discussion about different treatments, and confusion between aligned versus shared decisions. Conclusion: Available questionnaires may overestimate shared decision-making in vulnerable patients suggesting the need for alternative or modifications to existing methods. Furthermore, such metrics should be assessed for correlation with patient-reported outcomes, such as satisfaction with decisions and health status.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)680-686
Number of pages7
JournalSurgery (United States)
Volume163
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2018

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Shared decision-making during surgical consultation for gallstones at a safety-net hospital'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this