• Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health
• /
• v.43 no.1
• /
• pp.26-34
• /
• 2010

Objectives: The purpose of this research is to analyze the impact of shared-decision making on patient satisfaction. The study is significant since it focuses on developing appropriate methodologies and analyzing data to identify patient preferences, with the goals of optimizing treatment selection, and substantiating the relationship between such preferences and their impact on outcomes. Methods: A thorough literature review that developed the framework illustrating key dimensions of shared decision making was followed by a quantitative assessment and regression analysis of patient-perceived satisfaction, and the degree of shared-decision making. Results: A positive association was evident between shared-decision making and patient satisfaction. The impact of shared decision making on patient satisfaction was greater than other variable including gender, education, and number of visits. Conclusions: Patients who participate in care-related decisions and who are given an explanation of their health problems are more likely to be satisfied with their care. It would benefit health care organizations to train their medical professionals in this communication method, and to include it in their practice guidelines.

• Journal of the Korea Convergence Society
• /
• v.12 no.9
• /
• pp.361-371
• /
• 2021

This study aims to identify the moderating effect of patient activation in relation between trust in healthcare professionals and shared decision making in patients with diabetes mellitus. The participants were 186 patients who received treatment for diabetes at the department of endocrinology in the tertiary hospital located in Daejeon and consented to participate in our survey. The results of this study were a significant interaction between trust in healthcare professionals(β=0.32, p=.045) and patient activation(β=0.32, p=.024) was associated with shared decision making. The patient activation had a moderating effect between trust in healthcare professionals and shared decision making in patients with diabetes mellitus(β=0.25, p=.019). Therefore, it is necessary to assess trust in healthcare professionals to improve negative awareness of healthcare professionals and strengthen trust in them. In addition, to promote participation in shared decision making, it is necessary to develop a convergent program to focus patient activation.

• Journal of Hospice and Palliative Care
• /
• v.17 no.4
• /
• pp.278-288
• /
• 2014

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to analyze types of shared medical decision making by health professionals in a decision making position. Methods: The Q-methodology was used. Q sample was constructed with a total of 35 Q-statements that were offered with a 9-point rating scale. The statements were structured to generate answers that would form a shape of a normal distribution. Answers to Q sample were analyzed using a QUANL PC program. Results: Four types of shared medical decision making were identified. Type I is patient-centered decision making, Type II is physician-centered, Type III is health professional-centered and Type IV is patient-family-centered. Conclusion: Study results indicate that it is recommended to develop an education program based on the four types of shared medical decision making so that health professionals can be provided with different approaches according to their decision making style.

• Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing
• /
• v.42 no.4
• /
• pp.453-465
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The study was done to develop a shared decision-making scale for end-of-life patients in Korea. Methods: The process included construction of a conceptual framework, generation of initial items, verification of content validity, selection of secondary items, preliminary study, and extraction of final items. The participants were 388 adults who lived in one of 3 Korean metropolitan cities: Seoul, Daegu, or Busan. Item analysis, factor analysis, criterion related validity, and internal consistency were used to analyze the data. Data collection was done from July to October 2011. Results: Thirty-four items were selected for the final scale, and categorized into 7 factors explaining 61.9% of the total variance. The factors were labeled as sharing information (9 items), constructing system (7 items), explanation as a duty (5 items), autonomy (4 items), capturing time (3 items), participation of family (3 items), and human respect (3 items). The scores for the scale were significantly correlated among shared decision-making scale, terminating life support scale, and dignified dying scale. Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the 34 items was .94. Conclusion: The above findings indicate that the shared decision-making scale has a good validity and reliability when used for end-of-life patients in Korea.

• 한국노년학
• /
• v.38 no.3
• /
• pp.501-519
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this study was to explore perception about shared decision making of family caregivers of patients with early dementia (PWED). This study was conducted with a sample of 12 family caregivers (mean age = $71.4{\pm}10.4$) of PWED from three dementia safety centers in Seoul. In-depth interviews were done for each participant about shared decision making and data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Six categories and 17 sub-categories identified for participants' perception about shared decision making: means to facilitate communication with patients with dementia, means to secure autonomy of patients, opportunity to facilitate treatment, cause of increasing family caregivers' burden, cause of worsening relationship with patients, and option for choices depending on priority change. The findings of this study can provide a knowledge basis for health care professionals and policy makers to understand how family caregivers of PWED think about shared decision making. It would be of great value to develop educational programs and practical guidelines about shared decision making for PWED and their family, which may contribute to respecting PWED's self-determination right as well as reducing burden of their family.

• Proceedings of the Korean Operations and Management Science Society Conference
• /
• 2005.05a
• /
• pp.890-894
• /
• 2005

Coordination between supply chain partners is viewed critical to effective supply chain management. In many situations such as mutual investments or developing infrastructures for their operations related with each other, the coordination issue arises. Depending on the bargaining power balance between them, it is determined who will be able to exert more influence in making decisions related with such coordination. We consider two cases of the decision-making structure in the context of a simple supply chain consisting of two players, i.e., (1) the first case in which a supply chain partner dominates the decision-making process and the other passively follows the dominant player's decision, and (2) the other case in which the two players share the decision-making process equally. We examine which of the cases is better for the companies and where comes the value of the better case. To answer the research questions, we set up an optimal control theory model and derive an analytical solution. The analysis outcome indicates that the shared decision-making in general produces better results for both companies in the supply chain, and the value of the shared decision-making comes from more effective resource utilization than the dominated case.

• Proceedings of the Korean Operations and Management Science Society Conference
• /
• 2004.10a
• /
• pp.535-538
• /
• 2004

Coordination between supply chain partners is viewed critical to effective supply chain management. Depending on the bargaining power balance between them, it is determined who will be able to exert more influence in making decisions related with such coordination. We consider two cases of the decision-making structure in the context of a simple supply chain consisting of two players, i.e., (1) the first case in which a supply chain partner dominates the decision-making process and the other passively follows the dominant player's decision, and (2) the other case in which the two players share the decision-making process equally. In this paper, we examine which of the cases is better for the companies and where comes the value of the better case. To answer the research questions, we set up an optimal control theory model and derive an analytical solution. The analysis outcome indicates that the shared decision-making in general produces better results for both companies in the supply chain, and the value of the shared decision-making comes from more effective resource utilization than the dominated case.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Rural Architecture
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.23-30
• /
• 2011

Even though the existing urban residential district was obsolete and out of date in respects of physical environment, it is maintaining the function of dwelling. It ends up being regenerated as a viable urban residential district when improved the dwelling environment. Therefore, the government has been planning for the residential improvement projects for those areas applying for innovative ideas. But the government programs have often been troubled with people in the process of executing the projects or making a plan. In this respect, two parties couldn't communicate freely about the problem of those areas. So, the problematic issues of the areas should be shared with local residents at the beginning of decision making and the process of workshop participating local residents will be needed for understanding the standpoint of the residents. This study is to explore the potential of residents participating workshop to figure out current problems of the urban residential district in the process of executing the residential improvement project of Nakyang residence area in Sangju city. Upon investigation residents participating workshop is very practical in making a plan, but needs positive participation by resident and a decision making system dealing with the information shared and the understanding gained by participants.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.11 no.11
• /
• pp.338-349
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this study is to provide an innovative way enhancing patient satisfaction in military hospitals by analyzing the impact of shared-decision making on patient satisfaction. The survey questionnaire has been distributed for a month in two hospitals with similar goals, serving for officers and men of the armed forces, and 514 copies has been collected for the study. The study found a positive association between shared-decision making and patient satisfaction. The results of the study suggest the military hospitals should allocate their resources on the fundamental issues such as improving quality of services they provide rather than reimburse the services to compensate the service the armed forces received from private institutions.

• Journal of Hospice and Palliative Care
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.204-213
• /
• 2021

Purpose: At the end of life, communication is a key factor for good care. However, in clinical practice, it is difficult to adequately discuss end-of-life care. In order to understand and analyze how decision-making related to life-sustaining treatment (LST) is performed, the shared decision-making (SDM) behaviors of physicians were investigated. Methods: A questionnaire was designed after reviewing the literature on attitudes toward SDM or decision-making related to LST. A final item was added after consulting experts. The survey was completed by internal medicine residents and hematologists/medical oncologists who treat terminal cancer patients. Results: In total, 202 respondents completed the questionnaire, and 88.6% said that the decision to continue or end LST is usually a result of SDM since they believed that sufficient explanation is provided to patients and caregivers, patients and caregivers make their own decisions according to their values, and there is sufficient time for patients and caregivers to make a decision. Expected satisfaction with the decision-making process was the highest for caregivers (57.4%), followed by physicians (49.5%) and patients (41.1%). In total, 38.1% of respondents said that SDM was adequately practiced when making decisions related to LST. The most common reason for inadequate SDM was time pressure (89.6%). Conclusion: Although most physicians answered that they practiced SDM when making decisions regarding LST, satisfactory SDM is rarely practiced in the clinical field. A model for the proper implementation of SDM is needed, and additional studies must be conducted to develop an SDM model in collaboration with other academic organizations.