Medical Decision MakingAnalyzing the effects of shared decision-making, empathy and team interaction on patient satisfaction and treatment acceptance in medical rehabilitation using a structural equation modeling approach
Introduction
The concept of “Shared decision-making (SDM)” provides a promising approach for strengthening patient centeredness in medical rehabilitation [1], [2]. SDM is mostly described as a form of physician–patient interaction, which is characterized by an interactive decision-making process conducted on an equal footing [3], [4], [5], [6]. A joint determination of treatment goals and the selection of treatment measures, can lead to enhanced patient satisfaction with the treatment, an improved collaboration, a more effective transfer to everyday life, and ultimately better treatment outcomes [1], [7]. To implement SDM in practice, a sustainable physician–patient relationship and specific communication structures are required, which encourage the patient to express his expectations, goals and preferences. Patients show a high need for information [8], [9], [10] and an increasing desire to be involved into medical decision-making processes [11], [12]. The level of desire for participation differs between patients [12], [13], can change throughout the course of illness [14], [15] and is dependent on the desire for information [1], [13], [16]. It was shown that a good physician–patient relationship may be advantageous not only for subjectively perceived psychosocial criteria (e.g., quality of life, depression, anxiety), but also objective medical criteria (e.g., symptom alleviation, lowering of blood pressure and blood sugar [2], [17], [18], [19], [20], [63]). Besides physiological outcome parameters (e.g., reduced symptoms, improved functional capacity and pain control), positive effects of SDM have also been mentioned for mental health outcomes [1], [13], [18], [64]. Study findings show an increase in patients’ satisfaction, compliance and treatment acceptance [7], an increase in transfer to everyday life [1], [13] and an improvement in quality of life and medication adherence [65], [66], as well as a reduction of decision conflicts, anxiety [6] and medication costs [65]. Additionally, improvements in physician–patient communication, risk perception, and patient knowledge have been reported [15].
The degree of physicians’ empathy, which supports a better exchange of information between physician and patient, proved to be a further important component of a trustful relationship between physician and patient [43]. Positive effects of physician empathy include an increase in compliance, patient satisfaction, diagnostic precision [22], [23] and self-efficacy [24]. Furthermore, it is associated with a reduction in emotional distress [24], and an increase in professional satisfaction and a reduction of stress on the part of the physicians [23], [25], [26].
Additionally, a good collaboration of the various health care professionals within a team is also seen as a key factor for an effective and efficient health care [27], [28], [29]. Team interaction is associated with an improvement in treatment outcomes [30], [31], [32] and a reduction of morbidity [33], as well as an increase in patient satisfaction [30], [31], employee satisfaction [27] and a reduction of health economic costs [31], [32]. Nevertheless “Team interaction” is not systematically regarded in existing models addressing outcome related models of clinical communication and interaction structures and processes. To fill this gap, the “Model of Integrated Patient Centeredness (MIPC)” was developed to meet the necessity of consistently integrating the aspect of team interaction into the common model of Shared Decision Making [34], [35]. It is assumed that improved collaboration within a team can help to avoid non-integrated processes in the treatment process. Furthermore, joint decisions between physicians, treatment team and patients can be better accepted by all involved and implemented more consistently into practice [34], [35], [36].
Thus, the main aim of the study was to empirically define and test a theory based model and consequently create the basis for a model-oriented investigation of important theory-oriented relationships.
The goal of this work was to examine the described model using structural analysis with regard to empirically (a) assess model variables and (b) estimate the associations and predictive relationships. To this aim, the following hypotheses were formulated regarding (a) the data fit of the complete model and (b) the construct relationships: Hypothesis I The data information of the variables can be adequately modeled by a theory-based structural equation model. Hypothesis II The constructs “SDM”, “Empathy” and “Team interaction” have a predictive value for the constructs “Patient satisfaction” and “Treatment acceptance”. Hypothesis III “Team interaction” is an independent predictor of “Patient satisfaction” and “Treatment acceptance”. Hypothesis IV The effects of the independent variables “SDM”, “Team interaction” and “Empathy” on the dependent variables “Patient satisfaction” and “Treatment acceptance” are mediated by the variables “Compliance” and “Satisfaction with decision”.
Section snippets
9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9)
To measure the extent to which patients are included in decision-making processes, the “9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9)” was used [38]. The questionnaire can be applied across different diseases and is oriented toward the nine treatment steps of SDM [5], [38], [39]. The items are rated on a 6-point Likert scale from 0 (“completely disagree”) to 5 (“completely agree”). High values correspond to a high shared decision; e.g., “My doctor and I selected a treatment option
Descriptive statistics
The descriptive statistics are summarized for all scales in Table 2. “Empathy” (M = 4.15) proved to be “high” from the patient perspective, and “Team interaction” (M = 3.20) and “SDM” (M = 3.89) were rated as “relatively high” on average. Substantially lower values prevailed for “Patient satisfaction” (M = 2.48) and for “Satisfaction with decision” (M = 2.08). Generally, the “Treatment acceptance” (M = 3.04), “Patient cooperation” (M = 3.60) and “Adherence” of the patients (M = 1.76) was evaluated from their
Discussion
Based on the theoretical Model of Shared Decision Making (e.g., [3], [4]) and empirical findings on SDM (e.g., [2], [18]), physician empathy [20], [22], [23] and team interaction (e.g., [30], [32]), a model was developed which assumes the importance of these key factors for patient satisfaction and treatment acceptance of patients in medical rehabilitation. In addition to the empirical operationalizations, the assumed predictive relationships proved to be compatible with the data in the
Conflict of interest
All authors are requested to disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest including any financial, personal or other relationships with other people or organizations within three years of beginning the submitted work that could inappropriately influence, or be perceived to influence their work.
Acknowledgements
The study is part of the German grant program “Chronic illness and patient orientation” and is supported by the German Federal Ministry of Research and Education and the German statutory pension insurance scheme. We thank all of the providers in the rehabilitation clinics (AOK-Klinik Korbmattfelsenhof, AOK-Klinik Stöckenhöfe, Askepios Triberg, DAK-Haus Schwaben, Kliniken Dr. Vötisch, Rehabilitationsklinik Birkenbuck, Rehaklinik St. Landelin, Reha-Zentrum Todtmoos, Rheintalklinik,
References (66)
- et al.
Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango)
Soc Sci Med
(1997) - et al.
Decision-making in the physician–patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model
Soc Sci Med
(1999) - et al.
Information needs and preference for information of women with breast cancer over a first course of radiation therapy
Patient Educ Couns
(1999) - et al.
Patients’ preference for involvement in medical decision making: a narrative review
Patient Educ Couns
(2006) Interacting with cancer patients: the significance of physicians’ communication behavior
Soc Sci Med
(2003)- et al.
Risk-adjusted morbidity in teaching hospitals correlates with reported levels of communication and Collaboration on surgical teams but not with scale measures of teamwork climate, safety climate, or working conditions
J Amer Coll Surg
(2007) - et al.
Interprofessional SDM train-the-trainer program “Fit for SDM”: provider satisfaction and impact on partizipation
Patient Educ Couns
(2012) - et al.
The 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Development and psychometric properties in a primary care sample
Patient Educ Couns
(2010) - et al.
Development and first validation of the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q)
Patient Educ Couns
(2006) - et al.
A qualitative study of patient's views on the consultation at the Glasgow Homoeopathic Hospital, an NHS integrative complementary and orthodox medical care unit
Patient Educ Couns
(2004)
General practitioner empathy, patient enablement, and patient-reported outcomes in primary care in an area of high socio-economic deprivation in Scotland – a pilot prospective study using structural equation modeling
Patient Educ Couns
Determinants and patient-reported long-term outcomes of physician empathy in oncology: a structural equation modelling approach
Patient Educ Couns
Evaluation of the “Consultation and Relational Empathy” (CARE) measure by means of Rasch-analysis at the example of cancer patients
Patient Educ Couns
The client satisfaction questionnaire. Psychometric properties and correlations with service utilization and psychotherapy outcome
Eval Program Plann
Impact of the chronic care model on medication adherence when patients perceive cost as a barrier
Prim Care Diabetes
Therapeutic alliance perceptions and medication adherence in patients with bipolar disorder
J Affect Disord
Shared decision making: an approach to strengthening patient participation in rehabilitation
Die Rehabil
Influence of context effects on health outcomes: a systematic review
Lancet
Development and validation of assessment instruments for shared decision making
Bundesgesundheitsbl Gesundheitsforsch Gesundheitsschutz
Development and evaluation of interventions to support shared decision making – framework and measuring instruments
Z Med Psychol
Patient–provider communication in chronic illness: current state of research in selected areas
Die Rehabil
Variability in patient preferences for participating in medical decision making: implication for the use of decision support tools
Qual Saf Health Care
Information needs of patients with cancer: results from a large study in UK cancer centres
Brit J Cancer
Do patients want to participate in medical decision making?
J Amer Med Assoc
Educational needs among patients with chronic heart failure
Z Med Psychol
Shared decision making: an overview of international research literature
Soz Praventiv Med
Shared decision making in medicine
Dtsch Arztebl
When the treatment goal is not cure: are cancer patients equipped to make informed decisions?
J Clin Oncol
Effective physician–patient communication and health outcomes: a review
CMAJ
The impact of patient-centered care on outcomes
Fam Pract
Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the “Consultation and Relational Empathy” (CARE) measure at the example of cancer patients
Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol
Validity and reliability of the CARE measure in secondary care
Clin Govern: Int J
The effects of physician empathy on patient satisfaction and compliance
J Eval Health Prof
Cited by (81)
A scoping review into the explanations for differences in the degrees of shared decision making experienced by patients
2024, Patient Education and CounselingShared decision making, patient-centered communication and patient satisfaction – A cross-sectional analysis
2022, Patient Education and CounselingFamily involvement in medical decision making in Europe and the United States: A replication and extension in five Countries
2022, Social Science and MedicineAssessment of the quality of woman-centred midwifery care from the mothers’ perspective: A structural analysis of cross-sectional survey data[Formula presented]
2021, Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im GesundheitswesenCitation Excerpt :Although, Shared Decision-Making proved to be the dominant information sources reflected by all SDM-Q-9-M items, moderate local dependencies of the items have to be regarded. These local dependencies are in accordance with empirical findings in a study sample of rehabilitation patients [12]. The CFAs of the single assessments (CFI ≥ .96; SRMR ≤ .032) as well as the CFA of the multidimensional model (CFI = .96; SRMR = .049) indicate a satisfactory to good model fit after consideration of local dependencies.
Patient satisfaction in emergency department: Unveiling complex interactions by wearable sensors
2021, Journal of Business ResearchCitation Excerpt :Accordingly, researchers have tried to explore the complex links between team interaction and health process outcomes using Social Network Analysis (SNA) and other network metrics (Bae, Nikolaev, Seo, & Castner, 2015; Gray et al., 2010; Sabot et al., 2017). Past results seem to support analysis of dynamic interactions affecting the quality of health services, such as the provider communication network, the emotions expressed during team conversations, the physical proximity and posture, and the physical activity (Bae et al., 2015; De Vries, Bakker-Pieper, & Oostenveld, 2010; Quaschning et al., 2013; Vogus & McClelland, 2016). However, the difficulty in quantitatively measuring interactions and network dynamics still limits research on this topic to a few empirical studies (Bae et al., 2015; Sabot et al., 2017).