PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Cathy Charles

Publications and source records attributed to Cathy Charles.

11 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

Adolescents' perceptions of inpatient postpartum nursing care.

The authors used a transcendental phenomenological approach to describe adolescent mothers' satisfactory and unsatisfactory inpatient postpartum nursing care experiences. They analyzed data from 14 in-depth interviews and found that adolescent mothers' satisfaction is dependent on their perceptions of the nurse's ability to place them "at ease." Nursing care qualities that contributed to satisfactory experiences included nurses' sharing information about themselves, being calm, demonstrating confidence in mothers, speaking to adolescent and adult mothers in the same way, and anticipating unstated needs. Nursing care was perceived to be unsatisfactory when it was too serious, limited to the job required, or different from care to adult mothers, or when nurses failed to recognize individual needs. In extreme cases, unsatisfactory experiences hindered development of an effective nurse-client relationship. These findings illustrate the value of qualitative inquiry for understanding patients' satisfaction with care, can be used for self-reflection, and have implications for nursing education programs.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Cultural influences on the physician-patient encounter: The case of shared treatment decision-making.

OBJECTIVE: In this paper we discuss the influence of culture on the process of treatment decision-making, and in particular, shared treatment decision-making in the physician-patient encounter. We explore two key issues: (1) the meaning of culture and the ways that it can affect treatment decision-making; (2) cultural issues and assumptions underlying the development and use of treatment decision aids. METHODS: This is a conceptual paper. Based on our knowledge and reading of the key literature in the treatment decision-making field, we looked for written examples where cultural influences were taken into account when discussing the physician-patient encounter and when designing instruments (decision aids) to help patients participate in making decisions. RESULTS: Our assessment of the situation is that to date, and with some recent exceptions, research in the above areas has not been culturally sensitive. CONCLUSION: We suggest that more research attention should be focused on exploring potential cultural variations in the meaning of and preferences for shared decision-making as well as on the applicability across cultural groups of decision aids developed to facilitate patient participation in treatment decision-making with physicians. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Both patients and physicians need to be aware of the cultural assumptions underlying the development and use of decision aids and assess their cultural sensitivity to the needs and preferences of patients in diverse cultural groups.

Culture↗
PubMed2006

A shared treatment decision-making approach between patients with chronic conditions and their clinicians: the case of diabetes.

In this paper, we discuss the Charles et al. approach to shared treatment decision-making (STDM) as applied to patients with chronic conditions and their clinicians. We perceive differences between the type of treatment decisions (e.g. end-of-life care, surgical treatment of cancer) that generated existing approaches of shared decision-making for acute care conditions (including the Charles et al. model) and the treatment decisions that patients with chronic conditions need to make and revisit on an ongoing basis. For instance, treatment decisions in the chronic care setting are more likely to require a more active patient role in carrying out the decision and to offer a longer window of opportunity to make decisions and to revisit and reverse them without important loss than acute care decisions. The latter may require minimal patient participation to realize, are often urgent, and may be irreversible. Given these differences, we explore the applicability of the Charles et al. model of STDM in the chronic care context, especially chronic care that relies heavily on patient self-management (e.g. diabetes). To apply the Charles et al. model in this clinical context, we suggest the need to emphasize the patient-clinician relationship as one of partners in making difficult treatment choices and to add a new component to the shared decision-making approach: the need for an ongoing partnership between the clinical team (not just the clinician) and the patient. In the last section of the paper, we explore potential healthcare system barriers to STDM in chronic care delivery. Throughout the discussion we identify areas for further research.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Shared decision-making in primary care: tailoring the Charles et al. model to fit the context of general practice.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the application of the original Charles et al. model of shared treatment decision-making [Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sci Med 1997;44:681-92; Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model. Soc Sci Med 1999;49:651-61] in the context of general practice, and to determine whether the model needs tailoring for use in this clinical context. METHODS: Conceptual paper, presenting the defining characteristics of general practice compared to the original clinical context for which the model was developed (i.e. life threatening disease with different treatment options), and exploring how the model can be tailored for use in the context of general practice. RESULTS: We identify two areas where the original model requires tailoring: sharing the decision-making around agreeing on an agenda for each consultation; and adapting the information transfer component of the model to acknowledge that doctors may not be the only, or even the main, source of technical information for patients. Finally, we explore the importance of shared decision-making in the context of chronic disease. CONCLUSION: The Charles et al. model can be tailored for use in general practice. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Tailoring the model for use in general practice has implications for research, in terms of identifying the additional physician competencies needed for implementation. Policy makers who wish to promote shared decision-making need to ensure that incentives which prioritize access and health outcomes do not militate against shared decision-making in general practice.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2005

"Interaction" and research utilisation in health policies and programs: does it work?

The objective of this study was to assess if interaction between users and producers of research is associated with a greater level of adoption of research findings in the design and delivery of health care programs. Responses to the dissemination of a research report on breast cancer prevention were compared between two groups of public health units in Ontario, Canada. Although all public health units received the report, only a subset of units was involved in the development of the report, while others were not. Research utilisation was conceptualized in terms of stages, including reading the report, information processing, and application of findings for public health units' policies and programs. Using a multi-case study design, three units that contributed to the report's production (the interacting units) were compared with three units were not involved in producing the report (the comparison units) on the basis of research utilisation. Data collection involved group interviews and document review. Results demonstrated that interacting units had a greater understanding of the report's analysis and attached greater value to the report. However, interaction was not associated with greater levels of utilisation in terms of application. Both interacting and comparison units used the research findings to confirm that their on-going program activities were consistent with the research findings, and to compare their program performance relative to other units. In conclusion, interaction influenced the understanding of the research, and intent to use the research findings, but applied use was independent of interaction between producers and users of research.

Canada↗
PubMed2005

The Newcastle Satisfaction with Nursing Scales: a valid measure of maternal satisfaction with inpatient postpartum nursing care.

AIM: To test the validity of The Newcastle Satisfaction with Nursing Scales as measures of patient satisfaction with nursing care in an inpatient postpartum unit. BACKGROUND: The Newcastle Satisfaction with Nursing Scales (Experience of Nursing Care Scale and Satisfaction with Nursing Care Scale) were developed to measure the satisfaction of medical-surgical inpatients with nursing care. METHODS: The Newcastle Satisfaction with Nursing Scales were administered by interviewers to 189 postpartum women prior to hospital discharge. We tested the construct validity of the scales by making five a priori predictions: mothers who were more satisfied would be more likely to have one nurse caring for them and to recommend the postpartum unit to a friend. We also predicted that the Experience of Nursing Care and Satisfaction with Nursing Care Scales would be positively correlated with each other, with a global question about satisfaction with nursing care, and with a global question about satisfaction with overall postpartum stay. RESULTS: Four of the five a priori predictions were supported by the data. The mean Newcastle Satisfaction with Nursing Scale scores of mothers who would recommend the unit to a friend were higher (more satisfied) than those who would not (P < 0.001). The Experience of Nursing Care Scale and Satisfaction with Nursing Care Scale were positively and significantly correlated with each other (r = 0.9, P < 0.001). There was a positive and significant correlation between the scales and global ratings of nursing care (Experience Scale r = 0.79, P < 0.001; Satisfaction Scale r = 0.82, P < 0.001) and overall postpartum stay (Experience Scale r = 0.64, P < 0.001; Satisfaction Scale r = 0.68, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The Newcastle Satisfaction with Nursing Scales are valid measures of maternal satisfaction with inpatient postpartum nursing care.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Treatment decision aids: conceptual issues and future directions.

BACKGROUND: In the last 10 years, there has been a major growth in the development of treatment decision aids. Multiple goals have been identified for these tools. However, the rationale for and meaning of these goals at the conceptual level, the mechanisms through which decision aids are intended to achieve these goals, and value assumptions underlying the design of aids and associated values clarification exercises have often not been made explicit. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we present ideas to help inform the future development and evaluation of decision aids. RESULTS: We suggest, (i) that the appropriateness of using any decision aid be assessed within the context of the wider decision-making encounter within which it is embedded; (ii) that goal setting activities drive measurement activities and not the other way round; (iii) that the rationale for and meaning of goals at the conceptual level, and mechanisms through which they are intended to have an impact be clearly thought through and made explicit; (iv) that value assumptions underlying both decision aids and associated values clarification exercises be communicated to patients; (v) that taxonomies developed and used to classify various types of decision aids include a section on value assumptions underlying each tool; (vi) that further debate and discussion take place on the role of explicit values clarification exercises as a component of or adjunct to treatment decision aids and the feasibility of implementing valid measures. CONCLUSION: Further debate and discussion is needed on the above issues.

Canada↗
PubMed2004

Self-reported use of shared decision-making among breast cancer specialists and perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing this approach.

BACKGROUND: Physicians are increasingly urged to practice shared decision-making with their patients. Using a cross-sectional survey, we explored the extent to which Ontario breast cancer specialists report practising shared decision-making with their patients, their comfort level with this approach, and perceived barriers and facilitators to implementation. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: All Ontario surgeons and oncologists (radiation and medical) treating women with early-stage breast cancer were eligible for this study. Likert scales were used to measure physicians' comfort level with and self-reported use of different treatment decision-making approaches as well as perceived barriers and facilitators to treatment decision-making with patients. RESULTS: The response rate was 79% for oncologists and 72% for surgeons. More physicians from each specialty (87% of oncologists and 89% of surgeons) expressed high levels of comfort with clinical example 4 (designed to illustrate a shared approach) than with any of the other examples presented (e.g. the informed and paternalistic approach). Similarly, more oncologists and surgeons reported that their usual approach to treatment decision-making was like example 4 than like any other approach presented (56% of oncologists and 69% of surgeons, respectively). Comfort levels with example 4 for oncologists and surgeons were 31% and 20% higher, respectively, than the reported use of this approach. Lack of time and patient anxiety, patient lack of information and/or misinformation, and patient unwillingness or inability to participate were perceived by a substantial minority of both oncologists and surgeons as barriers to patient involvement in treatment decision-making. Key facilitators identified included patients' emotional readiness, support, information and trust in the physician. More research is needed to identify contextual, physician, patient, and interaction factors that will facilitate shared decision-making in the medical encounter and help both parties create an environment conducive to implementing this approach to the extent desired.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Lessons learned from the Decision Board: a unique and evolving decision aid.

One session of the conference was devoted to the presentation of different types of decision aids. This paper reports the experience and lessons learned through the development and use of the Decision Board. This is a uniquely interactive decision aid administered by the clinician during the medical consultation. The instrument has been developed in a number of clinical contexts, primarily regarding treatment options for cancer patients. Studies have shown the instrument to improve patient understanding and facilitate the shared decision-making process. Randomized trials are ongoing, evaluating the addition of the Decision Board to the traditional medical consultation. The instrument continues to evolve to meet patients' need for information and flexibility in presentation. Computer-based versions of the Decision Board are currently being developed.

Journal Article↗