Challenges and strategies in patients’ health priorities-aligned decision-making for older adults with multiple chronic conditions

Abstract

Objectives While patients’ health priorities should inform healthcare, strategies for doing so are lacking for patients with multiple conditions. We describe challenges to, and strategies that support, patients’ priorities-aligned decision-making. Design Participant observation qualitative study. Setting Primary care and cardiology practices in Connecticut. Participants Ten primary care clinicians, five cardiologists, and the Patient Priorities implementation team (four geriatricians, physician expert in clinician training, behavioral medicine expert). The patients discussed were ≥ 66 years with >3 chronic conditions and ≥10 medications or saw ≥ two specialists. Exposure Following initial training and experience in providing Patient Priorities Care, the clinicians and Patient Priorities implementation team participated in 21 case-based, group discussions (10 face-to-face;11 telephonic). Using emergent learning (i.e. learning which arises from interactions among the participants), participants discussed challenges, posed solutions, and worked together to determine how to align care options with the health priorities of 35 patients participating in the Patient Priorities Care pilot. Main outcomes Challenges to, and strategies for, aligning decision-making with patient’s health priorities. Results Categories of challenges discussed among participants included uncertainty, complexity, and multiplicity of problems and treatments; difficulty switching to patients’ priorities as the focus of decision-making; and differing perspectives between patients and clinicians, and among clinicians. Strategies identified to support patient priorities-aligned decision-making included starting with one thing that matters most to each patient; conducting serial trials of starting, stopping, or continuing interventions; focusing on function (i.e. achieving patient’s desired activities) rather than eliminating symptoms; basing communications, decision-making, and effectiveness on patients’ priorities not solely on diseases; and negotiating shared decisions when there are differences in perspectives. Conclusions The discrete set of challenges encountered and the implementable strategies identified suggest that patient priorities-aligned decision-making in the care of patients with multiple chronic conditions is feasible, albeit complicated. Findings require replication in additional settings and determination of their effect on patient outcomes.

Person‐centred shared decision making

“…Multiple subspecialty consultants, each focused only on their chosen organ system, tend to create incoherent and burdensome treatment plans aimed at various outcomes that may or may not be at all important to the patient. Tinetti et al helped operationalize a model of SDM, shared even between the patient and multiple clinicians, focused on achieving, or at least prioritizing, concrete patient‐identified goals . The Patient Priorities Care (PPC) process incorporates tools to help elucidate patient goals and communication strategies to facilitate both patient‐clinician as well as clinician‐clinician interactions .…”

Effect of Telephone-Delivered Collaborative Goal Setting and Behavioral Activation vs Enhanced Usual Care for Depression Among Adults With Uncontrolled Diabetes

“…Future efforts to systematically align psychosocial and behavioral intervention efforts with ongoing clinical care practices through interprofessional teams may improve immediate and longer-term outcomes for complex patient populations. 48,49…”

Feasibility of Clinicians Aligning Health Care with Patient Priorities in Geriatrics Ambulatory Care

“…The PCP then discusses the patient’s priorities during the encounter (Figure 1, step 3). While reviewing the care plan, the PCP uses strategies for making care recommendations that meet the patient’s priorities 7 . PCPs might stop a medication the patient views as burdensome, discuss referrals for wanted services that may help achieve a goal (e.g., physical therapy to help walk a mile daily), or discuss difficult treatment trade‐offs (e.g., short‐term dizziness vs long‐term cardiovascular prevention).…”