Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Clin Nurs ; 2024 May 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38757768

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health-related decision-making is a complex process given the variability of treatment options, conflicting treatment plans, time constraints and variable outcomes. This complexity may result in patients experiencing decisional regret following decision-making. Nonetheless, literature on decisional regret in the healthcare context indicates inconsistent characterization and operationalization of this concept. AIM(S): To conceptually define the phenomenon of decisional regret and synthesize the state of science on patients' experiences with decisional regret. DESIGN: A concept analysis. METHODS: Rodgers' evolutionary method guided the conceptualization of this review. An interdisciplinary literature search was conducted from 2003 until 2023 using five databases, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science. The search informed how the concept manifested across health-related literature. We used PRISMA-ScR checklist to guide the reporting of this review. RESULTS: Based on the analysis of 25 included articles, a conceptual definition of decisional regret was proposed. Three defining attributes underscored the negative cognitive-emotional nature of this concept, post-decisional experience relating to the decision-making process, treatment option and/or treatment outcome and an immediate or delayed occurrence. Antecedents preceding decisional regret comprised initial psychological or emotional status, sociodemographic determinants, impaired decision-making process, role regret, conflicting treatment plans and adverse treatment outcomes. Consequences of this concept included positive and negative outcomes influencing quality of life, health expectations, patient-provider relationship and healthcare experience appraisal. A conceptual model was developed to summarize the concept's characteristics. CONCLUSION: The current knowledge on decisional regret is expected to evolve with further exploration of this concept, particularly for the temporal dimension of regret experience. This review identified research, clinical and policy gaps informing our nursing recommendations for the concept's evolution. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This concept analysis examines existing literature and does not require patient-related data collection. The methodological approach does not necessitate collaboration with the public.

2.
Heart Lung ; 66: 56-70, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38583277

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Social determinants of health (SDOH) may influence the clinical management of patients with heart failure. Further research is warranted on the relationship between SDOH and Ventricular Assist Device (VAD) therapy for heart failure. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this integrative review was to synthesize the state of knowledge on the intersection of SDOH with VAD therapy. METHODS: Guided by Whittemore and Knafl's methodology, this literature search captured three concepts of interest including VAD therapy, SDOH, and their domains of intersection with patient selection, decision-making, treatment outcome, and resource allocation. CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched in March 2023. Articles were included if they were peer-reviewed publications in English, published between 2006 and 2023, conducted in the United States, and examined VAD therapy in the context of adult patients (age ≥ 18 years). RESULTS: 22 quantitative studies meeting the inclusion criteria informed the conceptualization of SDOH using the Healthy People 2030 framework. Four themes captured how the identified SDOH intersected with different processes relating to VAD therapy: patient decision-making, healthcare access and resource allocation, patient selection, and treatment outcomes. Most studies addressed the intersection of SDOH with healthcare access and treatment outcomes. CONCLUSION: This review highlights substantial gaps in understanding how SDOH intersect with patient and patient selection for VAD. More research using mixed methods designs is warranted. On an institutional level, addressing bias and discrimination may have mitigated health disparities with treatment outcomes, but further research is needed for implementing system-wide change. Standardized assessment of SDOH is recommended throughout clinical practice from patient selection to outpatient VAD care.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure , Heart-Assist Devices , Social Determinants of Health , Humans , Heart-Assist Devices/statistics & numerical data , Heart Failure/therapy , Patient Selection
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...