Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 7, 2026
A Mouse Model of Orthopedic Surgery to Study Postoperative Cognitive Dysfunction and Tissue Regeneration
Published on: February 27, 2018
Shared decision-making for postoperative analgesia: A semistructured qualitative study
Amalia M A van den Berg1, Peep F M Stalmeier, Gert Jan Scheffer
1From the Department of Anaesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine (AMAvdB, GJS, MJLB), Department for Health Evidence (PFMS) and Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands (RPH).
Background:
Shared decision-making (SDM) and decision-support tools have attracted broad support in healthcare as they improve medical decision-making. Experts disagree on how these can help patients evaluate their present situation and possible outcomes of therapy, and how they might reduce decisional conflict. Little is known about their implementation, especially in anaesthesiology.
Objective:
To obtain a more fundamental understanding of pre-operative SDM and evaluate the use of a decision-support tool for postoperative analgesia after major thoracic and abdominal surgery.
Design:
A qualitative study with semistructured, in-depth interviews of patients and professionals.
Setting:
Patient recruitment took place at the Radboud University Medical Centre in Nijmegen and the Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital in Nijmegen, a nonacademic teaching centre. Professionals of the Radboud University Medical Centre were invited to participate in the interviews.
Participants:
Interviews were performed with 10 individual patients and two focus groups both consisting of eight different professionals.
Main Outcome Measures:
To gain insight into the provision of pre-operative information, decision-making processes and the clarity and usability of a prototype decision-support tool.
Results:
Professionals seemed to provide their patients with information directed towards the application of epidural analgesia, providing little attention to its negative effects. For many patients, the information was not tailored to their needs. Patients' involvement in decision-making was minimal, but they did not feel a need for more involvement. They were positive about the decision-support tool, although they indicated that it would not have influenced their treatment decision. Professionals expressed their doubt about the capacity of their patients to fully understand the decisions involved and about the clinical usability of the decision-support tool, because patients might misinterpret the information provided.
Conclusion:
The results of this study suggest that both patients and professionals did not adhere to some 'self-evident' principles of SDM when postoperative analgesia after major thoracic and abdominal surgery was discussed.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
03:46Qualitative Analysis
For instance, group IV...
01:10Qualitative Analysis
There are two main approaches to qualitative analysis:...
01:25Analgesia and Pain Management
01:20Decision Making
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
01:09Decision Making: P-value Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses: a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
01:14Decision Making: Traditional Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...