Posted: September 11th, 2020
Assignment, Patient Preferences and Decision Making essay
Review the Resources and reflect on a time when you experienced a patient being brought into (or not being brought into) a decision regarding their treatment plan.
Review the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute’s Decision Aids Inventory at https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/.
Choose “For Specific Conditions,” then Browse an alphabetical listing of decision aids by health topic.
NOTE: To ensure compliance with HIPAA rules, please DO NOT use the patient’s real name or any information that might identify the patient or organization/practice.
Post a brief description of the situation you experienced and explain how incorporating or not incorporating patient preferences and values impacted the outcome of their treatment plan. Be specific and provide examples. Then, explain how including patient preferences and values might impact the trajectory of the situation and how these were reflected in the treatment plan. Finally, explain the value of the patient decision aid you selected and how it might contribute to effective decision making, both in general and in the experience you described. Write a page paper – Describe how you might use this decision aid inventory in your professional practice or personal life.
——
Free Essay Sample
Patient Preferences and Decision Making
Name
Academic Institution
Patient Preferences and Decision Making
The scenario involved a 38-year old patient with an enlarged prostate. The options available included to have surgery or not, to wait or start taking medication. The patient had the fear that the condition would develop into cancer or a complicated condition that could be hard to treat. However, despite the fear they had religious beliefs that were against surgery especially in the reproductive parts. I involved the patient in the decision-making process by providing them with the facts and options available (Schroy III, Mylvaganam & Davidson, 2014). The patient appreciated the involvement in the decision-making process.
The decision to involve the patient in the decision-making process was important due to patient preferences (Schroy III, Mylvaganam & Davidson, 2014). The patient’s preferences impacted the treatment process and the treatment outcome. For instance, the patient preferred to take medication that would decrease the severity of the symptoms such as dysuria and painful ejaculation. The patient believed the medication would help avoid the complications associated with enlarged prostate surgery. The patient also had religious beliefs that were against surgery related to reproductive parts. For example, the patient believed the surgery would interfere with his sex life and the ability to bear children. Therefore, due to the patient’s values, surgery was not a preferred option (Schroy III, Mylvaganam & Davidson, 2014). The outcome of the treatment involved taking the medication and visiting the facility for further examination after a month.
Patient’s preferences impact the treatment plan and the outcomes. When patients are involved in the decision-making process they indicate their expectations, fear, beliefs, and preferences. The patient’s preferences that were based on a cost-benefit analysis led to the decision to provide medication for the enlarged prostate (Opperman, Liebig, Bowling, Johnson & Harper, 2016). Surgery was one of the options, but the patient was against it since it was against religious beliefs. Additionally, the shared decision resulted in a patient-centered treatment plan. The reason is that the medication prescribed and the future appointments were made in agreement with the expectations of the patient.
The selected patient decision aid was treatment through medication to decrease the severity of the symptoms. The decision was effective since the enlarged prostate did not present severe symptoms that could interfere with sex life and urination. Therefore, the medication could help in addressing the pain which was a major symptom that prompted the patient to visit the health facility. Additionally, the treatment was essential since the patient’s religious beliefs were against surgery especially in the reproductive parts (Kon, Davidson, Morrison, Danis & White, 2016). The medication provided involved subsequent appointments to check the progress. The progress could form the basis for further decisions in the future.
The decision aid inventory was essential and could be used in the future while handling different patients. For instance, the shared decision was important since it respected the religious beliefs of the patient. In the future, I will use the inventory to ensure the shared decision observes the interest or preferences of the patient (Kon, Davidson, Morrison, Danis & White, 2016). Additionally, in the future, I will consider the personal preferences of a patient against the professional standards of treatment. According to Hoffmann, Montori and Del Mar (2014) the consideration helps achieve a critical balance between what the patient wants and what professional standards demand. The experience with a patient whose religious beliefs do not support surgery is also an eye-opener. It shows that it is necessary to always involve a patient in the decision-making process to ensure perspectives from both sides are considered.
References
Hoffmann, T. C., Montori, V. M., & Del Mar, C. (2014). The connection between evidence-based medicine and shared decision making. Jama, 312(13), 1295-1296.
Kon, A. A., Davidson, J. E., Morrison, W., Danis, M., & White, D. B. (2016). Shared decision-making in intensive care units. Executive summary of the American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society policy statement.
Opperman, C., Liebig, D., Bowling, J., Johnson, C. S., & Harper, M. (2016). Measuring return on investment for professional development activities: Implications for practice. Journal for Nurses in Professional Development, 32(4), 176-184.
Schroy III, P. C., Mylvaganam, S., & Davidson, P. (2014). Provider perspectives on the utility of a colorectal cancer screening decision aid for facilitating shared decision making. Health Expectations, 17(1), 27-35.
