Related Experiment Videos
Development of a "Patient Rights" Subscale to Measure Informed Decision-Making Within the Dyadic Decisional Conflict
Holly B Goldberg1, Allison Shorten2, Brett Shorten3
1The Chicago School of Professional Psychology, Los Angeles, California holly@hgoldberg.com.
Background And Purpose:
A modified Dyadic Decisional Conflict Scale (D-DCS) and new Patient Rights subscale to measure perceptions of informed decision-making regarding use of epidural analgesia during childbirth are tested.
Methods:
Thirty-five primiparous women and 52 providers from three hospitals tested the modified instrument. Cronbach's α coefficient assessed reliability. Mokken scale, principal components, and correlation analyses assessed unidimensionality of subscales.
Results:
Internal reliability was demonstrated for the D-DCS-Patient (Cronbach's α = 0.846) and D-DCS-Provider (α = 0.888). Further analyses suggest the Patient Rightssubscale has potential to make a unique contribution to the D-DCS.
Conclusions:
The modified D-DCS and Patient Rights subscale allow for a more comprehensive study of informed healthcare decision-making that includes legal and ethical elements, which may aid development of targeted interventions to improve decision-making.