Working in partnership: the application of shared decision‐making to health visitor practice

Astbury, Ruth; Shepherd, Ashley; Cheyne, Helen

doi:10.1111/jocn.13480

Cited by 11 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… Is appropriate consideration given to the limitations associated with this integration? Qualitative studies Abrines-Jaume, 2016 [ 50 ] ○ ○ ○ ○ Angst, 1996 [ 102 ] ○ ○ ● ● Astbury, 2017 [ 103 ] ○ ○ ○ ● Beck, 2014 [ 104 ] ○ ○ ○ ● Boland, 2016 [ 105 ] ○ ○ ○ ● Cahill, 2007 [ 96 ] ○ ○ ○ ○ Coyne, 2006 [ 106 ] ○ ○ ● ● Coyne, 2011 [ 69 ] ○ ○ ○ ● Coyne, 2012, [ 68 ] ○ ○ …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers and facilitators of pediatric shared decision-making: a systematic review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundShared decision-making (SDM) is rarely implemented in pediatric practice. Pediatric health decision-making differs from that of adult practice. Yet, little is known about the factors that influence the implementation of pediatric shared decision-making (SDM). We synthesized pediatric SDM barriers and facilitators from the perspectives of healthcare providers (HCP), parents, children, and observers (i.e., persons who evaluated the SDM process, but were not directly involved).MethodsWe conducted a systematic review guided by the Ottawa Model of Research Use (OMRU). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PubMed, and PsycINFO (inception to March 2017) and included studies that reported clinical pediatric SDM barriers and/or facilitators from the perspective of HCPs, parents, children, and/or observers. We considered all or no comparison groups and included all study designs reporting original data. Content analysis was used to synthesize barriers and facilitators and categorized them according to the OMRU levels (i.e., decision, innovation, adopters, relational, and environment) and participant types (i.e., HCP, parents, children, and observers). We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to appraise study quality.ResultsOf 20,008 identified citations, 79 were included. At each OMRU level, the most frequent barriers were features of the options (decision), poor quality information (innovation), parent/child emotional state (adopter), power relations (relational), and insufficient time (environment). The most frequent facilitators were low stake decisions (decision), good quality information (innovation), agreement with SDM (adopter), trust and respect (relational), and SDM tools/resources (environment). Across participant types, the most frequent barriers were insufficient time (HCPs), features of the options (parents), power imbalances (children), and HCP skill for SDM (observers). The most frequent facilitators were good quality information (HCP) and agreement with SDM (parents and children). There was no consistent facilitator category for observers. Overall, study quality was moderate with quantitative studies having the highest ratings and mixed-method studies having the lowest ratings.ConclusionsNumerous diverse and interrelated factors influence SDM use in pediatric clinical practice. Our findings can be used to identify potential pediatric SDM barriers and facilitators, guide context-specific barrier and facilitator assessments, and inform interventions for implementing SDM in pediatric practice.Trial RegistrationPROSPERO CRD42015020527Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-018-0851-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers and facilitators of pediatric shared decision-making: a systematic review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As is often the case in MCFH research, although reporting on perspectives of parents, fathers were rare participants in reported research, and their perspectives were usually provided by others (Astbury et al, 2017; Bidmead, 2013; Sanders et al, 2018). The included literature focused on nurse–mother relationships.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They advised that: “… identifying the issue which needed to be addressed, in order to improve the well-being of the child in a clear understandable, shared way, was a prerequisite for shared decision-making, but it did not always appear to take place” (221). They noted that although nurses felt they were working in partnership with families to plan care, “Choices that were offered to parents related more to decisions about timescales of implementing interventions” (Astbury et al, 2017: 219). Other studies identified joint decisions were limited to where to see the nurse and who to use for child health checks.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Working with families: A systematic scoping review of family-centred care in universal, community-based maternal, child, and family health services

Ridgway

Hackworth

Nicholson

et al. 2020

J Child Health Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children’s long- and short-term health and developmental outcomes can be improved when families are engaged and supported, and inform care planning. Family-centred care (FCC) underpins policy directions for universal, community-based, child and family health services in the early years, although its implementation in this context is poorly understood. This systematic scoping review of the current literature aimed to improve understanding of FCC implementation in maternal, child, and family health universal services. Key databases and grey literature were searched using descriptors of maternal, child, and family health population and context, and FCC concept. Reference checking identified further literature for analysis. Thirteen included papers reported on nine studies from Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Limited participant representation of fathers and diverse community members was evident. Deductive thematic analysis identified four areas of FCC demonstrated in this literature: respectful relationships, effective communication to foster shared understanding, flexible and contextualized care, and support for autonomy and agency. The literature demonstrated the interplay between organizational, professional, and recipient factors and their impact on the implementation of FCC. For successful FCC implementation, all these elements should be considered.

show abstract

“…They were especially important in initially engaging clients as it was recognised that many of the groups PHNs work with often do not access services and are variously described as “hard to reach” or “seldom heard” (Cotton, 2015; Noonan, Galvin, Doody, & Jomeen, 2017). Once engagement has been achieved, encouraging sustained contact and motivating clients to make lifestyle changes were also viewed as a relationship‐building skill needed by the public health nurse (Astbury, Shepherd, & Cheyne, 2017; Olsen et al, 2017; Riding, Glendening, & Heaslip, 2017).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Models and frameworks that enable nurses to develop their public health practice—A scoping study

Ezhova

Sayer

Newland

et al. 2020

Journal of Clinical Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims and objectives This scoping review commissioned by the Public Health England, WHO collaborating Centre, aimed to explore the models and frameworks which enable nurses to develop their public health practice and deliver public health interventions to individuals, families and communities. Background There is a plethora of literature regarding the role, activities and scope of practice undertaken by public health nurses across the world. However, only two reviews have explored the models and frameworks used for public health nursing practice. Design The study drew upon an established framework with a narrative review drawing upon five methodological steps. Methods A search of databases, Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, CINHAL and British Nursing Index, was undertaken. The search took place between April 2018 and June 2018 retrieving 9,513 peer‐reviewed articles published from 2008. Results Ninety‐five studies were retrieved and analysed thematically. From an initial review of literature, two themes were identified: public health models used in practice and models used in public health education. Within the first theme, three subthemes were emerged: Characteristics of the interventions; Characteristics of the public health nurse; and Lack of measurable health benefits. Within the second theme, three subthemes were identified: Faculty and Students Working Together; The Experiential Academic Approach, and What works in Educating Nurses for Public Health. Conclusion The review identified that many models and frameworks are used in practice. However, within public health practice there is a limited evidence base and it fails to demonstrate that the frameworks and models developed for practice result in measurable health benefits on an individual or population level. However, within education innovative models were apparent with collaborative partnerships enabling preregistration nursing students to develop public health nursing competencies. Relevance to clinical practice Innovative approaches to education of preregistration nursing students could point the way forward for the delivery of public health nursing practice.

show abstract

Working in partnership: the application of shared decision‐making to health visitor practice

Abstract: Health visitors are aware that planning interventions with parents can be complex. These findings indicate the value of using a shared decision-making framework to structure planning, as application of a framework identified the processes that support a collaborative approach in practice.

Cited by 11 publications

References 13 publications

Barriers and facilitators of pediatric shared decision-making: a systematic review

Barriers and facilitators of pediatric shared decision-making: a systematic review

Working with families: A systematic scoping review of family-centred care in universal, community-based maternal, child, and family health services

Models and frameworks that enable nurses to develop their public health practice—A scoping study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About