Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Dec;10(4):364-79.
doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00465.x.

Prediction of health professionals' intention to screen for decisional conflict in clinical practice

France Légaré  1 , Ian D Graham, Annette C O'Connor, Michèle Aubin, Lucie Baillargeon, Yvan Leduc, Jean Maziade
Affiliations

Prediction of health professionals' intention to screen for decisional conflict in clinical practice

France Légaré et al. Health Expect. 2007 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: To identify the determinants of the intention of physicians to screen for decisional conflict in clinical practice.

Background: Screening for decisional conflict is one of the key competencies when educating health professionals about shared decision making. Theory-based knowledge about variables predicting their intention to screen for decisional conflict in clinical practice would help design effective implementation interventions in this area.

Design: Data of two cross-sectional surveys embedded within a large implementation study of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) in primary care.

Setting and participants: In total, 122 health professionals from five family practice teaching units.

Methods: Intention to screen for decisional conflict in clinical practice was defined as the intention to use the clinical version of the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) with patients at the end of the clinical encounter. It was assessed at the entry and the exit from this study. Both intentions were entered as a dependent variable in multivariate analyses.

Main results: At entry, the intention was influenced by: attitude (P < 0.001), subjective norm (P < 0.001), perceived behavioural control (P < 0.001) and clinical site (P < 0.05). On exit, it was influenced by: subjective norm (P < 0.001), perceived behavioural control (P < 0.001), clinical site (P < 0.05), international Continuing Medical Education (CME) (P < 0.05), other diplomas (P < 0.05) and intervention (P < 0.05). In post hoc analyses, there was a statistically significant difference between entry and exit in the impact of the level of exposure to the multifaceted implementation intervention on the intention (P = 0.003).

Conclusions: Variables predicting the intention of health professionals to screen for decisional conflict in clinical practice using the DCS change over time suggesting that effective implementation interventions in this area will need to be modified longitudinally.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow of the study participants.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hibbard JH. Engaging health care consumers to improve the quality of care. Medical Care, 2003; 41: I61–I70. - PubMed
    1. Coulter A. Paternalism or partnership? Patients have grown‐up and there’s no going back [editorial; comment] [see comments]. BMJ, 1999; 319: 719–720. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Towle A, Godolphin W. Framework for teaching and learning informed shared decision‐making. BMJ, 1999; 319: 766–771. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Weston WW. Informed and shared decision‐making: the crux of patient centred care. CMAJ, 2001; 165: 438–439. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Towle A, Godolphin W. Education and training of health care professionals In: Edwards A, Elwyn G. (eds) Evidence‐Based Patient Choice Inevitable or Impossible? Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001: 245–270.

Publication types