Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPopejoy, Emma
dc.contributor.authorManning, Joseph C
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-21T15:25:44Z
dc.date.available2025-01-21T15:25:44Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationPopejoy E., Almack K., Manning J.C., Johnston B. and Pollock K. (2022) 'Communication strategies and persuasion as core components of shared decision-making for children with life-limiting conditions: A multiple case study', Palliative Medicine, 36(3), pp. 519–528. doi: 10.1177/02692163211068997 https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163211068997.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0269-2163
dc.identifier.issn1477-030X
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12904/19162
dc.description.abstractBackground: Families and professionals caring for children with life-limiting conditions face difficult healthcare decisions. Shared decision-making is promoted in many countries, however little is known about factors influencing these processes. Aim(s): To explore the communication strategies used in shared decision-making for children with life-limiting conditions. Design(s): A longitudinal, qualitative, multiple-case study. Cases were centred around the child and parent/carer(s). Most cases also included professionals or extended family members. Data from interviews, observations and medical notes were re-storied for each case into a narrative case summary. These were subject to comparative thematic analysis using NVivo11. Setting/participants: Eleven cases recruited from three tertiary hospitals in England. 23 participants were interviewed (46 interviews). Cases were followed for up to 12 months between December 2015 and January 2017. 72 observations were conducted and the medical notes of nine children reviewed. Finding(s): Strategies present during shared decision-making were underpinned by moral work. Professionals presented options they believed were in the child's best interests, emphasising their preference. Options were often presented in advance of being necessary to prevent harm, therefore professionals permitted delay to treatment. Persuasion was utilised over time when professionals felt the treatment was becoming more urgent and when families felt it would not promote the child's psychosocial wellbeing. Conclusion(s): Communication strategies in shared decision-making are underpinned by moral work. Professionals should be aware of the models of shared decision-making which include such communication strategies. Open discussions regarding individuals' moral reasoning may assist the process of shared decision-making. Copyright © The Author(s) 2021.
dc.description.urihttps://doi.org/10.1177/02692163211068997en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectChilden_US
dc.subjectCommunicationen_US
dc.subjectParentsen_US
dc.subjectFamilyen_US
dc.titleCommunication strategies and persuasion as core components of shared decision-making for children with life-limiting conditions: A multiple case studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
rioxxterms.funderDefault funderen_US
rioxxterms.identifier.projectDefault projecten_US
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_US
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1177/02692163211068997en_US
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_US
refterms.dateFCD2025-01-21T15:25:46Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.panelUnspecifieden_US
html.description.abstractBackground: Families and professionals caring for children with life-limiting conditions face difficult healthcare decisions. Shared decision-making is promoted in many countries, however little is known about factors influencing these processes. Aim(s): To explore the communication strategies used in shared decision-making for children with life-limiting conditions. Design(s): A longitudinal, qualitative, multiple-case study. Cases were centred around the child and parent/carer(s). Most cases also included professionals or extended family members. Data from interviews, observations and medical notes were re-storied for each case into a narrative case summary. These were subject to comparative thematic analysis using NVivo11. Setting/participants: Eleven cases recruited from three tertiary hospitals in England. 23 participants were interviewed (46 interviews). Cases were followed for up to 12 months between December 2015 and January 2017. 72 observations were conducted and the medical notes of nine children reviewed. Finding(s): Strategies present during shared decision-making were underpinned by moral work. Professionals presented options they believed were in the child's best interests, emphasising their preference. Options were often presented in advance of being necessary to prevent harm, therefore professionals permitted delay to treatment. Persuasion was utilised over time when professionals felt the treatment was becoming more urgent and when families felt it would not promote the child's psychosocial wellbeing. Conclusion(s): Communication strategies in shared decision-making are underpinned by moral work. Professionals should be aware of the models of shared decision-making which include such communication strategies. Open discussions regarding individuals' moral reasoning may assist the process of shared decision-making. Copyright © The Author(s) 2021.en_US
rioxxterms.funder.project94a427429a5bcfef7dd04c33360d80cden_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record