IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v25y2016i17-18p2550-2558.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The emergency patient's participation in medical decision‐making

Author

Listed:
  • Li‐Hsiang Wang
  • Suzanne Goopy
  • Chun‐Chih Lin
  • Alan Barnard
  • Chin‐Yen Han
  • Hsueh‐Erh Liu

Abstract

Aims and objectives The purpose of this research was to explore the medical decision‐making processes of patients in emergency departments. Background Studies indicate that patients should be given enough time to acquire relevant information and receive adequate support when they need to make medical decisions. It is difficult to satisfy these requirements in emergency situations. Limited research has addressed the topic of decision‐making among emergency patients. Design This qualitative study used a broadly defined grounded theory approach to explore decision‐making in an emergency department in Taiwan. Methods Thirty emergency patients were recruited between June and December 2011 for semi‐structured interviews that were audio‐taped and transcribed verbatim. Results The study identified three stages in medical decision‐making by emergency patients: predecision (interpreting the problem); decision (a balancing act) and postdecision (reclaiming the self). Transference was identified as the core category and pattern of behaviour through which patients resolved their main concerns. This transference around decision‐making represents a type of bricolage. Conclusions The findings fill a gap in knowledge about the decision‐making process among emergency patients. Relevance to clinical practice The results inform emergency professionals seeking to support patients faced with complex medical decision‐making and suggest an emphasis on informed patient decision‐making, advocacy, patient‐centred care and in‐service education of health staff.

Suggested Citation

  • Li‐Hsiang Wang & Suzanne Goopy & Chun‐Chih Lin & Alan Barnard & Chin‐Yen Han & Hsueh‐Erh Liu, 2016. "The emergency patient's participation in medical decision‐making," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(17-18), pages 2550-2558, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:25:y:2016:i:17-18:p:2550-2558
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13296
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13296
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13296?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Venkatesh, Viswanath & Morris, Michael G. & Ackerman, Phillip L., 2000. "A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Differences in Individual Technology Adoption Decision-Making Processes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 33-60, September.
    2. Lisa M. Schwartz & Steven Woloshin & H. Gilbert Welch, 2005. "Can Patients Interpret Health Information? An Assessment of the Medical Data Interpretation Test," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 25(3), pages 290-300, May.
    3. Yew Kong Lee & Wah Yun Low & Chirk Jenn Ng, 2013. "Exploring Patient Values in Medical Decision Making: A Qualitative Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-9, November.
    4. Heidemarie Kremer & Gail Ironson & Neil Schneiderman & Martin Hautzinger, 2007. "``It's My Body'': Does Patient Involvement in Decision Making Reduce Decisional Conflict?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 27(5), pages 522-532, September.
    5. Opher Caspi & Mary Koithan & Michael W. Criddle, 2004. "Alternative Medicine or “Alternative†Patients: A Qualitative Study of Patient-Oriented Decision-Making Processes with Respect to Complementary and Alternative Medicine," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 24(1), pages 64-79, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vishal K. Gupta & Suman Niranjan & Banu A. Goktan & John Eriskon, 2016. "Individual entrepreneurial orientation role in shaping reactions to new technologies," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 935-961, December.
    2. Cowan, Kelly R. & Daim, Tugrul U., 2011. "Review of technology acquisition and adoption research in the energy sector," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 183-199.
    3. Junmin Lee & Keungoui Kim & Hyunha Shin & Junseok Hwang, 2018. "Acceptance Factors of Appropriate Technology: Case of Water Purification Systems in Binh Dinh, Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-20, June.
    4. Margaret Gerteis & Rosemary Borck, "undated". "Shared Decision-Making in Practice: Lessons from Implementation Efforts," Mathematica Policy Research Reports f802e52b8442486594ecda927, Mathematica Policy Research.
    5. Syed Saad Hussain & Jabran Aziz & Ahsan Raza Jaffari & Maira Fatima & Syed Kamran Wasiq Ejaz, 2012. "Cellular Services Packages and their Impact on Social Values of Youth," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 4(4), pages 204-210.
    6. Li-Su Huang & Cheng-Po Lai, 2014. "Knowledge Management Adoption And Diffusion Using Structural Equation Modeling," Global Journal of Business Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 8(1), pages 39-56.
    7. Rahman Ummeh Habiba Faria Benteh & Zafar Muhammad Khubaib, 2020. "Factors Influencing Uber Adoption In Bangladesh And Pakistan," Open Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 86-97, January.
    8. Sara Cannizzaro & Rob Procter & Sinong Ma & Carsten Maple, 2020. "Trust in the smart home: Findings from a nationally representative survey in the UK," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-30, May.
    9. Oghuma, Apollos Patricks & Chang, Younghoon & Libaque-Saenz, Christian Fernando & Park, Myeong-Cheol & Rho, Jae Jeung, 2015. "Benefit-confirmation model for post-adoption behavior of mobile instant messaging applications: A comparative analysis of KakaoTalk and Joyn in Korea," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 658-677.
    10. Woersdorfer, Julia Sophie & Kaus, Wolfhard, 2011. "Will nonowners follow pioneer consumers in the adoption of solar thermal systems? Empirical evidence for northwestern Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2282-2291.
    11. Renata Benigna Gonçalves & Júlio César Bastos Figueiredo, 2022. "Effects of perceived risks and benefits in the formation of the consumption privacy paradox: a study of the use of wearables in people practicing physical activities," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1485-1499, September.
    12. Ertugrul Uysal & Sascha Alavi & Valéry Bezençon, 2022. "Trojan horse or useful helper? A relationship perspective on artificial intelligence assistants with humanlike features," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 50(6), pages 1153-1175, November.
    13. Dileep Kumar M & Harvi S, 2014. "Malaysian Y Generation Consumer Research: Does Gender and Technology Literacy affirmative towards E-commerce activities?," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 6(12), pages 906-918.
    14. Md Shamimul Islam & Noorliza Karia & Mohamed Soliman Mohamed Soliman & Mahmudul Hasan Fouji & Jamshed Khalid & Muhammad Khaleel, 2017. "Adoption of Mobile Banking in Bangladesh: A Conceptual Framework," Review of Social Sciences, LAR Center Press, vol. 2(8), pages 1-8, August.
    15. Siebert, Johannes Ulrich & Kunz, Reinhard E. & Rolf, Philipp, 2021. "Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 264-282.
    16. Herbjørn Nysveen & Per Egil Pedersen, 2016. "Consumer adoption of RFID-enabled services. Applying an extended UTAUT model," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 293-314, April.
    17. Simone Mueller & Larry Lockshin & Jordan Louviere, 2010. "What you see may not be what you get: Asking consumers what matters may not reflect what they choose," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 335-350, December.
    18. Xesfingi, Sofia & Vozikis, Athanasios, 2014. "What shapes eHealth literacy of an individual?," MPRA Paper 60187, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Faheem Gul Gilal & Jian Zhang & Rukhsana Gul Gilal & Naeem Gul Gilal, 2020. "Linking motivational regulation to brand passion in a moderated model of customer gender and age: an organismic integration theory perspective," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 87-113, February.
    20. Chen Yang & Jing Hu, 2022. "When do consumers prefer AI-enabled customer service? The interaction effect of brand personality and service provision type on brand attitudes and purchase intentions," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 29(2), pages 167-189, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:25:y:2016:i:17-18:p:2550-2558. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.