Assessing patients’ involvement in decision making during the nutritional consultation with a dietitian

Background  Shared decision making (SDM) represents an interesting approach to optimize the impact of dietary treatment, but there is no evidence that SDM is commonly integrated into diet‐related health care. Objective  To assess the extent to which dietitians involve patients in decisions about die...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy 2014-08, Vol.17 (4), p.545-554
Hauptverfasser: Vaillancourt, Hugues, Légaré, France, Lapointe, Annie, Deschênes, Sarah‐Maude, Desroches, Sophie
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background  Shared decision making (SDM) represents an interesting approach to optimize the impact of dietary treatment, but there is no evidence that SDM is commonly integrated into diet‐related health care. Objective  To assess the extent to which dietitians involve patients in decisions about dietary treatment. Methods  We audiotaped dietitians conducting nutritional consultations with their patients, and we transcribed the tapes verbatim. Three trained raters independently evaluated the content of the nutritional consultations using a coding frame based on the 12 items of the French‐language version of the OPTION scale, a validated and reliable third‐observer instrument designed to assess patients’ involvement by examining specific health professionals’ behaviours. Coding was facilitated by the qualitative research software NVivo 8. We assessed internal consistency with Cronbach’s alpha and inter‐rater reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results  Of the 40 dietitians eligible to participate in the study, 19 took part. We recruited one patient per participating dietitian. The overall mean OPTION score was 29 ± 8% [range, 0% (no patient involvement in the decision] to 100% [high patient involvement)]. The mean duration of consultations was 50 ± 26 min. The OPTION score was positively correlated with the duration of the consultation (r = 0.65, P 
ISSN:1369-6513
1369-7625
DOI:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00783.x