scholarly journals User-Centred Design with a Remote Approach: Experiences from the Chronic Pain Project

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Berglind F. Smaradottir ◽  
Johan Gustav Bellika ◽  
Aina Fredeng ◽  
Asbjørn J. Fagerlund
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Patient Organisation ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
User Centred Design ◽  
User Groups ◽  
User Workshop ◽  
Remote User

User-centred design involves end-users or user groups during all the parts of the development process. The research project Chronic Pain aims to develop a shared decision making application for patients and physicians, addressing individually adapted pain treatment. The project employs a user-centred design process, and in middle of it, Covid-19 pandemic social distancing restrictions were imposed. This paper presents how the user-centred design process together with a patient organisation was transformed to a digital approach and the experiences from performing a remote co-creation user workshop. The digital approximation had a satisfactory result and the main contribution lies in the sharing of recommendations for how to practically apply a remote user-centred design methodology.

Preferences for shared decision making in chronic pain patients compared with patients during a premedication visit

2006 ◽  
Vol 50 (8) ◽  
pp. 1019-1026 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. D. Spies ◽  
C. M. Schulz ◽  
E. Weiß-Gerlach ◽  
B. Neuner ◽  
T. Neumann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Chronic Pain Patients ◽  
Pain Patients

scholarly journals Managing Chronic Pain in an Opioid Crisis: What Is the Role of Shared Decision-Making?

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (10) ◽  
pp. 1239-1247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marianne S. Matthias ◽  
Tasneem L. Talib ◽  
Monica A. Huffman
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Opioid Crisis

Medical cannabis and cannabinoids for chronic pain: Summary of a Rapid Recommendation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason W. Busse ◽  
James MacKillop
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Sleep Quality ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Physical Functioning ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Medical Cannabis ◽  
Recent Guideline

LAY SUMMARY Medical cannabis is increasingly used by Canadian Veterans to manage chronic pain; however, the benefits and harms are uncertain. This commentary summarizes a recent guideline that found small to very small benefits of medical cannabis for pain relief, physical functioning and sleep quality, and evidence for a small to very small increase in several transient harms. The close balance between benefits and harms supports shared decision-making with Veterans living with chronic pain to ensure the decision whether to pursue a trial of medical cannabis is consistent with their values and preferences.

Discussions between patients with chronic pain and their primary care provider about opioids and pain relief during routine clinic encounters

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-146
Author(s):  
Mayra Massey, MMFT ◽  
Carissa Carissa van den Berk Clark, PhD, MSW ◽  
Jocelyn Fowler, MMFT ◽  
Jeffrey F. Scherrer, PhD
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Care Provider ◽  
Primary Care Provider ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Difficult Conversations ◽  
Noncancer Pain

Objective: Existing studies indicate low levels of trust and shared decision making exist in the process of prescribing opioids for noncancer pain. Patient-provider communication has not been compared between patients receiving non-opioid pain medication, and those receiving opioids. This pilot study evaluated communication about pain management between patients with noncancer pain and their provider.Design: Patient encounters with a primary care provider (PCP) were audiorecorded, followed by a short patient questionnaire to measure physician trust, depression, and anxiety.Setting: Data were collected (October 2016-May 2017) at a primary care clinic in Saint Louis, MO.Patients: Patients with noncancer chronic pain, receiving a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) or an opioid with and without an NSAID.Methods: Medical conversation analysis guided data interpretation of codes and themes.Results: Themes were framed around stages of the routine PCP encounter (ie, opening, presenting complaint, examination, diagnosis, treatment, and closing). Themes within these stages included: managing stability (opening stage), fixation with pain (presenting complaint), changing the subject (examination stage), difficult conversations (diagnosis stage), patients chose protest or acceptance (treatment), and taking what you can get (closing).Conclusions: Much of the treatment of chronic pain, as a result of opioid prescriptions, revolves around negotiations about whether to use opioids or not. Patient education is required to disseminate realistic expectations regarding pain relief and risks of long-term opioid use. This may reduce patients’ focus on pain severity and difficult conversations and increase shared decision making.

scholarly journals Evaluating treatment modalities in chronic pain treatment by the multi-criteria decision making procedure

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ender Sir ◽  
Gül Didem Batur Sir
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Pharmacological Treatment ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Celiac Plexus Block ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract Background Chronic pain is one of the most common complaints of cancer patients. There are many pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment modalities used for the treatment of pain. Nonetheless, non-pharmacological interventions are preferred because of potential side effects in cases resistant to medical therapy that require a dose increase or potent drug use. In most real-life situations, the decision on which technique to choose is based on the clinical but subjective decisions of the practitioners. This study aimed to find out the best non-pharmacological treatment option for patients with chronic cancer pain by following a rational and reasonable approach. Methods Since the evaluation of treatment options requires to make a comparison between a number of alternatives in the light of certain criteria, we utilize the order relation analysis (G1-method) which is a method for determining the weights based on the improved Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The method uses the relative importances on prioritizing the four criteria and eight sub-criteria defined by the experts of three pain physicians, one oncologist, and one oncologic surgeon. Four alternatives are then compared according to the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) using the verbal subjective judgments of the practitioners. Results Obtained results indicate that the general medical condition of the patient and the stage of the cancer are the essential factors in the selection of the treatment method. It is followed by the extent of the pain and the level of evidence, respectively. According to the evaluations performed, spinal port and splanchnic nerve radiofrequency thermocoagulation treatments are the first and second priority methods for pain treatment, respectively, compared to lumbar epidural catheter and celiac plexus block. Conclusions The results of this study emphasize the need to integrate critical criteria into the decision-making process objectively. This is the first study in which multi-criteria decision-making tools are used in the evaluation and selection of pain management methods in cancer patients.

scholarly journals Making prognostic algorithms useful in shared decision-making: Patients and clinicians’ requirements for the Predict:Breast Cancer interface

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
G.D. Farmer ◽  
G.M. Pearson ◽  
W.J. Skylark ◽  
A.L.J. Freeman ◽  
D.J. Spiegelhalter
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Prognostic Models ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Cancer Treatments ◽  
User Centred Design ◽  
Post Surgery ◽  
Maximum Benefit ◽  
Adjuvant Breast Cancer

AbstractObjectivesTo develop a new interface for the widely used prognostic breast cancer tool: PREDICT. To facilitate shared decision-making around post-surgery breast cancer treatments. To derive insights into communicating the outputs of prognostic models to patients and their clinicians.MethodWe applied user-centred design principles in developing a new interface for PREDICT. The research involved online surveys, focus groups, meetings, and usability testing with patients, clinicians and the public.ResultsThe new interface has been launched and delivers around 30,000 sessions per month. We identified several principles that are useful when communicating the output of prognostic models, including multiple presentation formats, and contextualising statistics. A programme of future work based on patient and clinician feedback has been developed, including the provision of quantitative data on the adverse effects of adjuvant breast cancer treatments.ConclusionsFor prognostic algorithms to fulfil their potential to assist with shared decision-making they need carefully designed interfaces. User-centred design puts patients and clinicians needs at the forefront, allowing them to derive the maximum benefit from prognostic models.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document