This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Groome, P. A. Articles by Tousignant, P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Groome, P. A. Articles by Tousignant, P. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Content of a Decision Analysis for Treatment Choice in End-stage Renal Disease

Who Should Be consulted?

Tom A. Hutchinson, MB

Pierre Tousignant, MD

For an illness whose treatment options lead to similar survival, quality-of-life issues determine the choice. If the patient has not yet experienced the treatments, then the information provided regarding the options plays a crucial role in the patient's choice. The authors interviewed 43 people who are intimately involved with the treatments for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (ten physicians, 11 nurses, and 22 patients) with a view to determining what information needs to be considered when choosing between the various treatment options for this illness. They compared the three groups based on the items obtained from the interviews to deter mine whether the inclusion of patients in the process changed the content of the treatment descriptions. They were also interested in determining whether the use of the frequency with which an item is mentioned in the interviews is a valid measure of its relative importance to other items. 1,269 relevant items were obtained from the interviews and categorized into 51 areas of concern (subject domains). The health professionals (physicians and nurses) were found to have mentioned seven subject domains more often than the patients, and no domain was mentioned more often by the patients than by the health professionals. The frequency that an item was mentioned was correlated (r = 0.55) with direct measures of its importance. These results imply that careful consultation with health professionals to determine the content of a decision analysis or informational materials that address treatment choice is sufficient to address patient concerns and that items can be chosen for inclusion based on the relative frequencies with which they are mentioned. Key words: end-stage renal dis ease ; treatment choice; decision analysis; informed consent. (Med Decis Making 1994; 14:91-97)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 14, No. 1, 91-97 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9401400111


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. B. Bass, M. W. Jenckes, N. E. Fink, K. A. Cagney, A. W. Wu, J. H. Sadler, K. B. Meyer, Andrews. Levey, and N. R. Powe Use of Focus Groups to Identify Concerns about Dialysis Med Decis Making, August 1, 1999; 19(3): 287 - 295. [Abstract] [PDF]