RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Optimal intervals between repeat colonoscopies could improve patient outcomes and reduce costs. We evaluated: (a) concordance between clinician and guideline recommended colonoscopy screening intervals in Winnipeg, Manitoba, (b) clinician opinions about the utility of an electronic decision-making tool to aid in recommending screening intervals, and (c) the initial use of a decision-making smartphone/web-based application. METHODS: Clinician endoscopists and primary care providers participated in four focus groups (N = 22). We asked participating clinicians to evaluate up to 12 hypothetical scenarios and compared their recommended screening interval to those of North American guidelines. Fisher's exact tests were used to assess differences in agreement with guidelines. We developed a decision-making tool and evaluated it via a pilot study with 6 endoscopists. RESULT: 53% of clinicians made recommendations that agreed with guidelines in ≤ 50% of the hypothetical scenarios. Themes from focus groups included barriers to using a decision-making tool: extra time to use it, less confidence in the results of the tool over their own judgement, and having access to the information required by the tool (e.g., family history). Most were willing to try a tool if it was quick and easy to use. Endoscopists participating in the tool pilot study recommended screening intervals discordant with guidelines 35% of the time. When their recommendation differed from that of the tool, they usually endorsed their own over the guideline. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopists are overconfident and inconsistent with applying guidelines in their polyp surveillance interval recommendations. Use of a decision tool may improve knowledge and application of guidelines. A change in practice may require that the tool be coupled with continuing education about evidence for improved outcomes if guidelines are followed.
Asunto(s)
Colonoscopía , Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Humanos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Proyectos PilotoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: People living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) often make highly personal decisions about whether or not to disclose their HIV status in the workplace. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine current practices that support people living with HIV to make workplace disclosure decisions and to understand factors that affect disclosure decision-making. METHODS: Ninety-four people who provide health, social and peer-based services responded to an on-line survey about their experiences supporting workplace disclosure decisions of employees living with HIV. RESULTS: Respondents identified a range of strategies to support workplace disclosure decision-making. One-third of respondents were only a little or not confident in their abilities to support people in making disclosure decisions and 32% expressed little or no confidence in the resources available. Respondents working at HIV-specific organizations, as compared to respondents not working at those organizations, were more confident supporting people with disclosure decisions and in available resources, pâ<â.05. Perceived barriers to disclosure decisions included stigma, lack of knowledge, and personal factors. Supports for decision-making resided within personal, workplace and societal contexts. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides important understanding about the complexity of disclosure decision-making and strategies that people living with HIV can use to address this complex issue.
Asunto(s)
Revelación , Infecciones por VIH/psicología , Estigma Social , Canadá , Conducta de Elección , Toma de Decisiones , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Lugar de Trabajo/psicologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: People with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) require disease and lifestyle information to make health-related decisions in their daily lives. Derived from a larger qualitative study of the lived experiences of people with IBD, we report on findings that explored how people with IBD engage with health-related information in their daily lives. METHODS: Participants were recruited primarily from the Manitoba IBD Cohort Study. We used purposive sampling to select people with a breadth of characteristics and experiences. Individual interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed using inductive qualitative methods consistent with a phenomenological approach. RESULTS: Forty-five people with IBD participated; 51% were women. Findings highlighted the temporal and contextual influences on engagement with health-related information. Temporal influences were described as the changing need for health-related information over time. Participants identified 6 contextual factors influencing engagement with information to make health decisions: (1) emotional and attitudinal responses, (2) perceived benefits and risks, (3) trust in the source of the information, (4) knowledge and skills to access and use information, (5) availability of evidence to support decisions, and (6) social and economic environments. CONCLUSIONS: Findings illustrate the changing needs for health-related information over the course of IBD, and with evolving health and life circumstances. Practitioners can be responsive to information needs of people with IBD by having high-quality information available at the right time in a variety of formats and by supporting the incorporation of information in daily life.
Asunto(s)
Adaptación Psicológica , Toma de Decisiones , Gestión de la Información en Salud , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino/psicología , Tecnología de la Información/estadística & datos numéricos , Calidad de Vida , Adulto , Anciano , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Manitoba , Informática Médica , Persona de Mediana Edad , Investigación Cualitativa , Apoyo Social , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: People with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at increased risk for unemployment and work absenteeism over the course of their adult lives. However, little is known about the firsthand experiences of people living with the disease regarding perceived barriers, facilitators, and strategies for navigating work roles. METHODS: In this qualitative study, participants were purposefully recruited from 2 existing IBD cohort study samples. Recruitment strategies aimed for diversity in age, sex, and disease type, duration, and symptom activity. In-depth interviews sought perspectives of living with IBD. Data were analyzed using inductive qualitative methods. RESULTS: Forty-five people currently or previously in the workforce participated; 51% were female. The mean age was 45.4 years (SD = 16.1; range = 21-73 years). Mean IBD duration was 10.9 years (SD = 6.3). Participants had a broad range of experiences in adapting to work roles. IBD symptoms and treatments interacted with other personal and environmental factors to shape the experiences of work. Experiences were shaped by: (1) personal health and well-being, (2) personal values, beliefs, and knowledge, (3) job characteristics, (4) workplace physical environment, (5) workplace culture, and (6) financial factors. Participants identified personal strategies and environmental supports that assisted them to navigate their work roles. CONCLUSIONS: The perspectives of people with IBD provided in-depth understanding of contextual factors that influence work roles. They identified personal strategies to manage health and choices about work, environmental supports that promote timely workplace accommodations, and appropriate social insurance benefits as facilitators of work retention for people with IBD.