Development of the Conversational Health Literacy Assessment Tool for maternity care (CHAT-maternity-care): participatory action research.

BACKGROUND: Limited health literacy in (expectant) parents is associated with adverse health outcomes. Maternity care providers often experience difficulties assessing (expectant) parents' level of health literacy. The aim was to develop, evaluate, and iteratively adapt a conversational tool that supports maternity care providers in estimating (expectant) parents' health literacy. METHODS: In this participatory action research study, we developed a conversational tool for estimating the health literacy of (expectant) parents based on the Conversational Health Literacy Assessment Tool for general care, which in turn was based on the Health Literacy Questionnaire. We used a thorough iterative process including different maternity care providers, (expectant) parents, and a panel of experts. This expert panel comprised representatives from knowledge institutions, professional associations, and care providers with whom midwives and maternity care assistants work closely. Testing, evaluation and adjustment took place in consecutive rounds and was conducted in the Netherlands between 2019 and 2022. RESULTS: The conversational tool 'CHAT-maternity-care' covers four key domains: (1) supportive relationship with care providers; (2) supportive relationship within parents' personal network; (3) health information access and comprehension; (4) current health behaviour and health promotion. Each domain contains multiple example questions and example observations. Participants contributed to make the example questions and example observations accessible and usable for daily practice. The CHAT-maternity-care supports maternity care providers in estimating (expectant) parents' health literacy during routine conversations with them, increased maternity care providers' awareness of health literacy and helped them to identify where attention is necessary regarding (expectant) parents' health literacy. CONCLUSIONS: The CHAT-maternity-care is a promising conversational tool to estimate (expectant) parents' health literacy. It covers the relevant constructs of health literacy from both the Conversational Health Literacy Assessment Tool and Health Literacy Questionnaire, applied to maternity care. A preliminary evaluation of the use revealed positive feedback. Further testing and evaluation of the CHAT-maternity-care is required with a larger and more diverse population, including more (expectant) parents, to determine the effectiveness, perceived barriers, and perceived facilitators for implementation.

Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 7: Qualitative evidence synthesis for emerging themes in primary care research: Scoping review, meta-ethnography and rapid realist review.

This article, the seventh in a series aiming to provide practical guidance for qualitative research in primary care, introduces qualitative synthesis research for addressing health themes in primary care research. Qualitative synthesis combines rigorous processes and authorial judgement to present the collective meaning of research outputs; the findings of qualitative studies - and sometimes mixed-methods and quantitative research - are pooled. We describe three exemplary designs: the scoping review, the meta-ethnography and the rapid realist review. Scoping reviews aim to provide an overview of the evidence/knowledge or to answer questions regarding the nature and diversity of the evidence/knowledge available. Meta-ethnographies intend to systematically compare data from primary qualitative studies to identify and develop new overarching concepts, theories, and models. Rapid realist reviews aim to provide a knowledge synthesis by looking at complex questions while responding to time-sensitive and emerging issues. It addresses the question, 'what works, for whom, in what circumstances, and how?'We discuss these three designs' context, what, why, when and how. We provide examples of published studies and sources for further reading, including manuals and guidelines for conducting and reporting these studies. Finally, we discuss attention points for the research team concerning the involvement of necessary experts and stakeholders and choices to be made during the research process.

Integrating women's voices in quality improvement for maternity care: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Improving the quality of maternity care is high on the national agenda in the Netherlands. One aspect gaining significant attention is integrating women's experiences - as users of maternity care - in this quality improvement. The aim of this study was to gain deeper insights into how maternity care professionals in Dutch Maternity Care Collaborations integrate women's voices into quality improvement as part of integrated maternity care and what role midwives can have in this. METHODS: This was a descriptive qualitative study, using semi-structured individual interviews and content analysis for an in-depth exploration of maternity care professionals' experiences and opinions on integrating women's voices in quality improvement. Participants were twelve maternity care professionals involved in quality improvement activities from eight Dutch Maternity Care Collaborations. RESULTS: Four themes emerged: 'Quality improvement based on women's voices is still in its infancy' and was experienced as an important but challenging topic; 'Collecting women's voices' was conducted, but needed more facilitation; Using women's voices' was hindered by a lack of expertise and a structured feedback and feedforward system; and 'Ensuring listening to women's voices' and integrating them in quality improvement required further facilitation. CONCLUSIONS: Care professionals emphasized that listening to women's voices for quality improvement is important but challenging due to the lack of expertise, organizational structure, time, and financial resources. A feasible implementation strategy including concrete support is recommended by maternity care professionals to boost action.

Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 6: Longitudinal qualitative and mixed-methods approaches for longitudinal and complex health themes in primary care research.

This article, the sixth in a series aiming to provide practical guidance for qualitative research in primary care, introduces two approaches for addressing longitudinal and complex health themes in primary care research. The first approach - longitudinal qualitative research - supports the study of change during the life course. The second approach - mixed-methods research - integrates quantitative and qualitative research to gain new insights to address the complex and multifaceted themes in primary care.We discuss the context, what, why, when and how of these approaches and their main practical and methodological challenges. We provide examples of empirical studies using these approaches and sources for further reading.

Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 5: Co-creative qualitative approaches for emerging themes in primary care research: Experience-based co-design, user-centred design and community-based participatory research.

This article, the fifth in a series aiming to provide practical guidance for qualitative research in primary care, introduces three qualitative approaches with co-creative characteristics for addressing emerging themes in primary care research: experience-based co-design, user-centred design and community-based participatory research. Co-creation aims to define the (research) problem, develop and implement interventions and evaluate and define (research and practice) outcomes in partnership with patients, family carers, researchers, care professionals and other relevant stakeholders. Experience-based co-design seeks to understand how people experience a health care process or service. User-centred design is an approach to assess, design and develop technological and organisational systems, for example, eHealth, involving end-users in the design and decision-making processes. Community-based participatory research is a collaborative approach addressing a locally relevant health issue. It is often directed at hard-to-reach and vulnerable people. We address the context, what, why, when and how of these co-creative approaches, and their main practical and methodological challenges. We provide examples of empirical studies using these approaches and sources for further reading.

The paradoxes of communication and collaboration in maternity care: A video-reflexivity study with professionals and parents.

BACKGROUND: Research on maternity care often focuses on factors that prevent good communication and collaboration and rarely includes important stakeholders - parents - as co-researchers. To understand how professionals and parents in Dutch maternity care accomplish constructive communication and collaboration, we examined their interactions in the clinic, looking for "good practice". METHODS: We used the video-reflexive ethnographic method in 9 midwifery practices and 2 obstetric units. FINDINGS: We conducted 16 meetings where participants reflected on video recordings of their clinical interactions. We found that informal strategies facilitate communication and collaboration: "talk work" - small talk and humour - and "work beyond words" - familiarity, use of sight, touch, sound, and non-verbal gestures. When using these strategies, participants noted that it is important to be sensitive to context, to the values and feelings of others, and to the timing of care. Our analysis of their ways of being sensitive shows that good communication and collaboration involves "paradoxical care", e.g., concurrent acts of "regulated spontaneity" and "informal formalities". DISCUSSION: Acknowledging and reinforcing paradoxical care skills will help caregivers develop the competencies needed to address the changing demands of health care. The video-reflexive ethnographic method offers an innovative approach to studying everyday work, focusing on informal and implicit aspects of practice and providing a bottom up approach, integrating researchers, professionals and parents. CONCLUSION: Good communication and collaboration in maternity care involves "paradoxical care" requiring social sensitivity and self-reflection, skills that should be included as part of professional training.

Needs of parents and professionals to improve shared decision-making in interprofessional maternity care practice: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) is a critical but challenging component of high quality maternity care. In co-creation with parents and professionals, we are developing an intervention to improve SDM. As a first step we aimed to explore the experiences and needs of parents and professionals regarding shared decision-making in interprofessional antenatal, natal, and postnatal care. METHODS: We organized 11 focus groups in the Netherlands in November and December 2016. Parents, primary care midwives, hospital-based midwives, obstetricians, obstetric nurses, and maternity care assistants participated. RESULTS: Parents and professionals recognized the SDM steps of introducing a decision (choice talk) and discussing options (option talk), but most parents did not seem to discuss preferences and weigh options with professionals before making their final decision (decision talk). Barriers to SDM were often related to interprofessional collaboration, while good communication skills of parents and professionals facilitated SDM. An intervention to improve SDM would need to: (a) increase awareness and offer insight into the SDM process and roles and responsibilities of parents and professionals, (b) develop good communication skills, and (c) encourage interprofessional collaboration. The preferred design of the intervention was online, interactive, and practical. CONCLUSIONS: Parents and professionals will benefit from an intervention designed to improve SDM. A practical e-learning for all maternity care providers and e-health information for parents seems most appropriate. Key elements for the e-learning are raising awareness of the roles and responsibilities of parents and professionals, developing good communication skills and encouraging interprofessional collaboration. This requires a variety of educational strategies.

Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing.

In the course of our supervisory work over the years we have noticed that qualitative research tends to evoke a lot of questions and worries, so-called frequently asked questions (FAQs). This series of four articles intends to provide novice researchers with practical guidance for conducting high-quality qualitative research in primary care. By 'novice' we mean Master's students and junior researchers, as well as experienced quantitative researchers who are engaging in qualitative research for the first time. This series addresses their questions and provides researchers, readers, reviewers and editors with references to criteria and tools for judging the quality of qualitative research papers. The first article provides an introduction to this series. The second article focused on context, research questions and designs. The third article focused on sampling, data collection and analysis. This fourth article addresses FAQs about trustworthiness and publishing. Quality criteria for all qualitative research are credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Reflexivity is an integral part of ensuring the transparency and quality of qualitative research. Writing a qualitative research article reflects the iterative nature of the qualitative research process: data analysis continues while writing. A qualitative research article is mostly narrative and tends to be longer than a quantitative paper, and sometimes requires a different structure. Editors essentially use the criteria: is it new, is it true, is it relevant? An effective cover letter enhances confidence in the newness, trueness and relevance, and explains why your study required a qualitative design. It provides information about the way you applied quality criteria or a checklist, and you can attach the checklist to the manuscript.

Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis.

In the course of our supervisory work over the years, we have noticed that qualitative research tends to evoke a lot of questions and worries, so-called frequently asked questions (FAQs). This series of four articles intends to provide novice researchers with practical guidance for conducting high-quality qualitative research in primary care. By 'novice' we mean Master's students and junior researchers, as well as experienced quantitative researchers who are engaging in qualitative research for the first time. This series addresses their questions and provides researchers, readers, reviewers and editors with references to criteria and tools for judging the quality of qualitative research papers. The second article focused on context, research questions and designs, and referred to publications for further reading. This third article addresses FAQs about sampling, data collection and analysis. The data collection plan needs to be broadly defined and open at first, and become flexible during data collection. Sampling strategies should be chosen in such a way that they yield rich information and are consistent with the methodological approach used. Data saturation determines sample size and will be different for each study. The most commonly used data collection methods are participant observation, face-to-face in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. Analyses in ethnographic, phenomenological, grounded theory, and content analysis studies yield different narrative findings: a detailed description of a culture, the essence of the lived experience, a theory, and a descriptive summary, respectively. The fourth and final article will focus on trustworthiness and publishing qualitative research.

Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 2: Context, research questions and designs.

In the course of our supervisory work over the years, we have noticed that qualitative research tends to evoke a lot of questions and worries, so-called frequently asked questions (FAQs). This series of four articles intends to provide novice researchers with practical guidance for conducting high-quality qualitative research in primary care. By 'novice' we mean Master's students and junior researchers, as well as experienced quantitative researchers who are engaging in qualitative research for the first time. This series addresses their questions and provides researchers, readers, reviewers and editors with references to criteria and tools for judging the quality of qualitative research papers. This second article addresses FAQs about context, research questions and designs. Qualitative research takes into account the natural contexts in which individuals or groups function to provide an in-depth understanding of real-world problems. The research questions are generally broad and open to unexpected findings. The choice of a qualitative design primarily depends on the nature of the research problem, the research question(s) and the scientific knowledge one seeks. Ethnography, phenomenology and grounded theory are considered to represent the 'big three' qualitative approaches. Theory guides the researcher through the research process by providing a 'lens' to look at the phenomenon under study. Since qualitative researchers and the participants of their studies interact in a social process, researchers influence the research process. The first article described the key features of qualitative research, the third article will focus on sampling, data collection and analysis, while the last article focuses on trustworthiness and publishing.

Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 1: Introduction.

In the course of our supervisory work over the years, we have noticed that qualitative research tends to evoke a lot of questions and worries, so-called Frequently Asked Questions. This journal series of four articles intends to provide novice researchers with practical guidance for conducting high-quality qualitative research in primary care. By 'novice' we mean Master's students and junior researchers, as well as experienced quantitative researchers who are engaging in qualitative research for the first time. This series addresses their questions and provides researchers, readers, reviewers and editors with references to criteria and tools for judging the quality of papers reporting on qualitative research. This first article describes the key features of qualitative research, provides publications for further learning and reading, and gives an outline of the series.

External Validation Study of First Trimester Obstetric Prediction Models (Expect Study I): Research Protocol and Population Characteristics.

BACKGROUND: A number of first-trimester prediction models addressing important obstetric outcomes have been published. However, most models have not been externally validated. External validation is essential before implementing a prediction model in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to describe the design of a study to externally validate existing first trimester obstetric prediction models, based upon maternal characteristics and standard measurements (eg, blood pressure), for the risk of pre-eclampsia (PE), gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), spontaneous preterm birth (PTB), small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infants, and large-for-gestational-age (LGA) infants among Dutch pregnant women (Expect Study I). The results of a pilot study on the feasibility and acceptability of the recruitment process and the comprehensibility of the Pregnancy Questionnaire 1 are also reported. METHODS: A multicenter prospective cohort study was performed in The Netherlands between July 1, 2013 and December 31, 2015. First trimester obstetric prediction models were systematically selected from the literature. Predictor variables were measured by the Web-based Pregnancy Questionnaire 1 and pregnancy outcomes were established using the Postpartum Questionnaire 1 and medical records. Information about maternal health-related quality of life, costs, and satisfaction with Dutch obstetric care was collected from a subsample of women. A pilot study was carried out before the official start of inclusion. External validity of the models will be evaluated by assessing discrimination and calibration. RESULTS: Based on the pilot study, minor improvements were made to the recruitment process and online Pregnancy Questionnaire 1. The validation cohort consists of 2614 women. Data analysis of the external validation study is in progress. CONCLUSIONS: This study will offer insight into the generalizability of existing, non-invasive first trimester prediction models for various obstetric outcomes in a Dutch obstetric population. An impact study for the evaluation of the best obstetric prediction models in the Dutch setting with respect to their effect on clinical outcomes, costs, and quality of life-Expect Study II-is being planned. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry (NTR): NTR4143; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4143 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6t8ijtpd9).

Moderators of the effects of group-based physical exercise on cancer survivors' quality of life.

PURPOSE: This study explored demographic, clinical, and psychological moderators of the effect of a group-based physical exercise intervention on global quality of life (QoL) among cancer survivors who completed treatment. METHODS: Cancer survivors were assigned to a 12-week physical exercise (n = 147) or a wait-list control group (n = 62). The main outcome measure was global QoL, assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline and 12 weeks later. Potential moderators were age, gender, education level, marital status, employment status, type of treatment, time since treatment, the presence of comorbidities, fatigue, general self-efficacy, depression, and anxiety. Linear regression analyses were used to test effect modification of the intervention by each moderator variable using interaction tests (p ≤ 0.10). RESULTS: The physical exercise intervention effect on global QoL was larger for cancer survivors who received radiotherapy (ß = 10.3, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 4.4; 16.2) than for cancer survivors who did not receive radiotherapy (ß = 1.8, 95 % CI = -5.9; 9.5, p interaction = 0.10), larger for cancer survivors who received a combination of chemoradiotherapy (ß = 13.0, 95 % CI = 6.0; 20.1) than for those who did not receive this combination of treatments (ß = 2.5, 95 % CI = -3.7; 8.7, p interaction = 0.02), and larger for cancer survivors with higher baseline levels of fatigue (ß = 12.6, 95 % CI = 5.7; 19.6) than for those with lower levels (ß = 2.4, 95 % CI = -3.9; 8.7, p interaction = 0.03). No other moderating effects were found. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that cancer treatment modality and baseline fatigue levels moderate the effect of a physical exercise program on cancer survivors'global QoL.

On speaking terms: a Delphi study on shared decision-making in maternity care.

BACKGROUND: For most women, participation in decision-making during maternity care has a positive impact on their childbirth experiences. Shared decision-making (SDM) is widely advocated as a way to support people in their healthcare choices. The aim of this study was to identify quality criteria and professional competencies for applying shared decision-making in maternity care. We focused on decision-making in everyday maternity care practice for healthy women. METHODS: An international three-round web-based Delphi study was conducted. The Delphi panel included international experts in SDM and in maternity care: mostly midwives, and additionally obstetricians, educators, researchers, policy makers and representatives of care users. Round 1 contained open-ended questions to explore relevant ingredients for SDM in maternity care and to identify the competencies needed for this. In rounds 2 and 3, experts rated statements on quality criteria and competencies on a 1 to 7 Likert-scale. A priori, positive consensus was defined as 70% or more of the experts scoring ≥6 (70% panel agreement). RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 45 quality criteria statements and 4 competency statements. SDM in maternity care is a dynamic process that starts in antenatal care and ends after birth. Experts agreed that the regular visits during pregnancy offer opportunities to build a relationship, anticipate situations and revisit complex decisions. Professionals need to prepare women antenatally for unexpected, urgent decisions in birth and revisit these decisions postnatally. Open and respectful communication between women and care professionals is essential; information needs to be accurate, evidence-based and understandable to women. Experts were divided about the contribution of professional advice in shared decision-making and about the partner's role. CONCLUSIONS: SDM in maternity care is a dynamic process that takes into consideration women's individual needs and the context of the pregnancy or birth. The identified ingredients for good quality SDM will help practitioners to apply SDM in practice and educators to prepare (future) professionals for SDM, contributing to women's positive birth experience and satisfaction with care.

The role of maternity care providers in promoting shared decision making regarding birthing positions during the second stage of labor.

INTRODUCTION: Through the use of a variety of birthing positions during the second stage of labor, a woman can increase progress, improve outcomes, and have a positive birth experience. The role that a maternity care provider has in determining which position a woman uses during the second stage of labor has not been thoroughly explored. The purpose of this qualitative investigation was to explore how maternity care providers communicate with women during the second stage of labor regarding birthing position. METHODS: A literature-informed framework was developed to conduct a process of deductive content analysis of communication patterns between nulliparous women and their maternity care providers during the second stage of labor. Literature discussing shared decision making, control, and predictors of positive birth experiences were reviewed to develop a coding framework. The framework included the following categories: listening to women, encouragement, information, offering choices, and style of support. Forty-one audiotapes of women and their maternity care providers during the second stage of labor were transcribed verbatim and analyzed. RESULTS: Themes identified in the transcripts included all those in the analytic framework, plus 2 added categories of communication: empathy and interaction. Maternity care providers in this study enabled women to select various birthing positions using a dynamic process that moved between open, informative approaches and more closed, directive approaches, depending on the woman's needs and clinical condition. As clinical conditions unfolded, women became more actively involved in shared decision making regarding birthing positions, and maternity care providers found the right balance between being responsive to the woman's questions or directives. DISCUSSION: Enabling shared decision making during birth is not a linear process using a single approach; it is dynamic process that requires a variety of approaches. Maternity care providers can support a woman to use different birthing positions during the second stage of labor by employing a flexible style that incorporates clinical assessment and the woman's responses.

Influence on birthing positions affects women's sense of control in second stage of labour.

OBJECTIVE: to explore whether choices in birthing positions contributes to women's sense of control during birth. DESIGN: survey using a self-report questionnaire. Multiple regression analyses were used to investigate which factors associated with choices in birthing positions affected women's sense of control. SETTING: midwifery practices in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 1030 women with a physiological pregnancy and birth from 54 midwifery practices. FINDINGS: in the total group of women (n=1030) significant predictors for sense of control were: influence on birthing positions (self or self together with others), attendance of antenatal classes, feelings towards birth in pregnancy and pain in second stage of labour. For women who preferred other than supine birthing positions (n=204) significant predictors were: influence on birthing positions (self or self together with others), feelings towards birth in pregnancy, pain in second stage of labour and having a home birth. For these women, influence on birthing positions in combination with others had a greater effect on their sense of control than having an influence on their birthing positions just by themselves. KEY CONCLUSIONS: women felt more in control during birth if they experienced an influence on birthing positions. For women preferring other than supine positions, home birth and shared decision-making had added value. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: midwives can play an important role in supporting women in their use of different birthing positions and help them find the positions they feel most comfortable in. Thus, contributing to women's positive experience of birth.

Factors influencing the fulfillment of women's preferences for birthing positions during second stage of labor.

Having choices and being involved in decision making contributes to women's positive childbirth experiences. During a physiological birth, women's preferences can play a leading role in the choice of birthing positions. In this study, we explored women's preferences with regard to birthing positions during second stage of labor, with a special focus on women who preferred positions other than common supine positions. A questionnaire survey was conducted among women in 54 Dutch midwifery practices. Of the 1154 women in the study, 58.9% preferred supine positions, 19.6% preferred other positions (e.g. sitting or standing), and 21.5% had no distinct preference. Women who preferred supine positions gave birth in these positions more often than women with preferences for other positions. Among the women having a preference for other positions, the actual fulfillment of their preference was related to longer duration of second stage of labor, higher levels of education, the strength of the preference, and giving birth at home. These results demonstrate differences in women's use of preferred positions during childbirth. Midwives can contribute to women-centered care by proactively exploring women's preferences for birthing positions throughout pregnancy and birth, supporting women in developing well-informed choices and facilitating these choices where possible.

Women want proactive psychosocial support from midwives during transition to motherhood: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: to explore low-risk pregnant women's views on their preferences for psychosocial support from midwives during their transition to motherhood. DESIGN: a qualitative design with focus-group interviews and thematic analysis of the discussions. SETTINGS AND RESPONDENTS: 21 Dutch participants were included in three focus groups. Groups 1 (n=7) and 3 (n=8) consisted of pregnant women from four semi-urban midwifery practices, and group 2 (n=6) included participants from three urban midwifery practices. FINDINGS: the women wanted to take responsibility for their own well-being during pregnancy. In addition to informal support, they explicitly expressed a need for professional support from their midwives when undergoing the transition to motherhood. They wanted informational and emotional support from their midwives that addressed psychological and physical changes during pregnancy. They expressed a strong desire to be informed during pregnancy of how to prepare physically and psychologically for birth, recovery and motherhood. They also wanted help with sifting and interpreting information and, ultimately, wanted to make their own choices. KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: during their transition to motherhood, healthy low-risk pregnant women want attentive, proactive, professional psychosocial support from midwives. They expect their midwives to oversee the transition period and to be capable of supporting them in dealing with changes in pregnancy and in preparing for birth and motherhood.

Effects of cancer rehabilitation on problem-solving, anxiety and depression: a RCT comparing physical and cognitive-behavioural training versus physical training.

We tested the effects on problem-solving, anxiety and depression of 12-week group-based self-management cancer rehabilitation, combining comprehensive physical training (PT) and cognitive-behavioural problem-solving training (CBT), compared with PT. We expected that PT + CBT would outperform PT in improvements in problem-solving (Social Problem-Solving Inventory-Revised (SPSI-R)), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)), and that more anxious and/or depressed participants would benefit most from adding CBT to PT. Cancer survivors (aged 48.8 ± 10.9 years, all cancer types, medical treatment completed) were randomly assigned to PT + CBT (n = 76) or PT (n = 71). Measurement occasions were: before and post-rehabilitation (12 weeks), 3- and 9-month follow-up. A non-randomised usual care comparison group (UCC) (n = 62) was measured at baseline and after 12 weeks. Longitudinal intention-to-treat analyses showed no differential pattern in change between PT + CBT and PT. Post-rehabilitation, participants in PT and PT + CBT reported within-group improvements in problem-solving (negative problem orientation; p < 0.01), anxiety (p < 0.001) and depression (p < 0.001), which were maintained at 3- and 9-month follow-up (p < 0.05). Compared with UCC post-rehabilitation, PT and PT + CBT only improved in anxiety (p < 0.05). CBT did not add to the effects of PT and had no extra benefits for higher distressed participants. PT was feasible and sufficient for durably reducing cancer survivors' anxiety.

Patient's decision making in selecting a hospital for elective orthopaedic surgery.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The admission to a hospital for elective surgery, like arthroplasty, can be planned ahead. The elective nature of arthroplasty and the increasing stimulus of the public to critically select a hospital raise the issue of how patients actually take such decisions. The aim of this paper is to describe the decision-making process of selecting a hospital as experienced by people who underwent elective joint arthroplasty and to understand what factors influenced the decision-making process. METHODS: Qualitative descriptive study with 18 participants who had a hip or knee replacement within the last 5 years. Data were gathered from eight individual interviews and four focus group interviews and analysed by content analysis. RESULTS: Three categories that influenced the selection of a hospital were revealed: information sources, criteria in decision making and decision-making styles within the GP- patient relationship. Various contextual aspects influenced the decision-making process. Most participants gave higher priority to the selection of a medical specialist than to the selection of a hospital. CONCLUSION: Selecting a hospital for arthroplasty is extremely complex. The decision-making process is a highly individualized process because patients have to consider and assimilate a diversity of aspects, which are relevant to their specific situation. Our findings support the model of shared decision making, which indicates that general practitioners should be attuned to the distinct needs of each patient at various moments during the decision making, taking into account personal, medical and contextual factors.