No abstract

Background. A goal of shared decision making (SDM) is to ensure patients are well informed and receive preferred treatments. However, the relationship between SDM and health outcomes is not clear. Objective. The purpose was to examine whether patients who are well informed and receive their preferred treatment have better health outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants. A prospective cohort study at an academic medical center surveyed new patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis, herniated disc, or spinal stenosis 1 week after seeing a specialist and again 6 months later. Main Outcomes and Measures. The survey assessed knowledge, preferred treatment, and quality of life (QoL). The percentage of patients who were well informed and received preferred treatment was calculated (informed, patient centered [IPC]). A follow-up survey assessed QoL, decision regret, and satisfaction. Regression analyses with generalized estimating equations to account for clustering tested a priori hypotheses that patients who made IPC decisions would have higher QoL. Results. Response rate was 70.3% (652/926) for initial and 85% (551/ 648) for follow-up. The sample was 63.9 years old, 52.8% were female, 62.6% were college educated, and 49% had surgery. One-third (37.4%) made IPC decisions. Participants who made IPC decisions had significantly better overall (0.05 points (SE 0.02) for EQ-5D, P = 0.004) and disease-specific quality of life (4.22 points [SE 1.82] for knee, P = 0.02; 4.46 points [SE 1.54] for hip, P = 0.004; and 6.01 points [SE 1.51] for back, P \ 0.0001), higher satisfaction and less regret. Limitations. Observational study at a single academic center with limited diversity. Conclusions. Wellinformed patients who receive their preferred treatment also had better health outcomes and higher satisfaction.

There is increasing pressure to design systems of care that inform and involve patients in decisions about elective surgery. In this study, the authors found that patient decision aids, when used as part of routine orthopaedic care, were associated with increased knowledge, more shared decision-making, higher patient experience ratings, and lower surgical rates.

Shared decision making is a core component of population health strategies aimed at improving patient engagement. Massachusetts General Hospital's integration of shared decision making into practice has focused on the following three elements: developing a culture receptive to, and health care providers skilled in, shared decision making conversations; using patient decision aids to help inform and engage patients; and providing infrastructure and resources to support the implementation of shared decision making in practice. In the period 2005-15, more than 900 clinicians and other staff members were trained in shared decision making, and more than 28,000 orders for one of about forty patient decision aids were placed to support informed patient-centered decisions. We profile two different implementation initiatives that increased the use of patient decision aids at the hospital's eighteen adult primary care practices, and we summarize key elements of the shared decision making program.

Abstract. Due to the relatively high cost and inconvenience of upper endoscopic biopsy and the rising incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma, there is currently a need for an improved method for screening for Barrett's esophagus. Ideally, such a test would be applied in the primary care setting and patients referred to endoscopy if the result is suspicious for Barrett's. Tethered capsule endomicroscopy (TCE) is a recently developed technology that rapidly acquires microscopic images of the entire esophagus in unsedated subjects. Here, we present our first experience with clinical translation and feasibility of TCE in a primary care practice. The acceptance of the TCE device by the primary care clinical staff and patients shows the potential of this device to be useful as a screening tool for a broader population.

Internal medicine residents had considerable gaps in shared decision-making skills as measured in a baseline written exercise. Residents provided valuable contributions to the development of a Decision Worksheet to be used at the point of care. Participants rated the skills workshop highly, though interns rated the exercise more useful than PGY-2 and PGY-3 residents did. The Decision Worksheets were accessed often following the sessions; however, observing the Decision Worksheets in use in real time was a challenge in the resident-faculty clinic. Additional studies are warranted to examine whether the workshop was successful in increasing residents' ability to implement skills in practice.

No abstract

In light of the increasing demand for primary care services and the changing scope of health care, it is important to consider how the principles of primary care are taught in medical school. While the majority of schools have increased students' exposure to primary care, they have not developed a standardized primary care curriculum for undergraduate medical education. In 2013, the authors convened a group of educators from primary care internal medicine, pediatrics, family medicine, and medicine-pediatrics, as well as five medical students to create a blueprint for a primary care curriculum that could be integrated into a longitudinal primary care experience spanning undergraduate medical education and delivered to all students regardless of their eventual career choice.The authors organized this blueprint into three domains: care management, specific areas of content expertise, and understanding the role of primary care in the health care system. Within each domain, they described specific curriculum content, including longitudinality, generalism, central responsibility for managing care, therapeutic alliance/communication, approach to acute and chronic care, wellness and prevention, mental and behavioral health, systems improvement, interprofessional training, and population health, as well as competencies that all medical students should attain by graduation.The proposed curriculum incorporates important core features of doctoring, which are often affirmed by all disciplines but owned by none. The authors argue that primary care educators are natural stewards of this curriculum content and can ensure that it complements and strengthens all aspects of undergraduate medical education.