Historically, patient choice was not prominently featured in health systems foci, but this is changing (Chiapperino & Tengland, 2015; Kon, 2010). Often this dated approach involved a paternalistic mode whereby physician-driven decision-making was typical, and people were given little choice over their treatment (Kon, 2010).
Today patient choice means that nurses need to be open to seeing and working with the patient according to their choice, not health professional choices. For example, as Jane Bates says in her position piece (2013) patients “just want an expert to give . . . an expert opinion [they are] too weary to make a choice” (p. 25). Extrapolating from this statement nurses ought to be walking alongside the patient to support choice rather than abdicate the entire process of choosing to the patient. This calls into question ideas of partnership and how this is enacted between people with long term conditions and health professional.
Partnership is described by Jonsdottir et al. (2004) as “the dialogue is open, caring, mutually responsive and non-directive. The nurse attends to that which is of concern to patients about their health predicaments, and the meaning in the health experience unfolds” (p. 241). Hence, the partnership is about a caring relationship between patient and nurse, with a focus on what is significant regarding the patients perspective of health. Partnership requires parties to trust and connect. From partnership, arises the essential nature of caring for people in the partnership with an orientation to the patient and their needs, many of these needs being self-identified. Caring within the partnership and supporting patient choice instinctively intersects with patient-centered care. Boon (2012) explains that patient and family centred care comprises dignity and respect, with sharing of information, participative collaboration. Partnership intersects with patient choice as they are essential to successful modern nursing.
Methods:
In this research, RN participants engage in conversations about patient choice from the perspective of a health professional observing people grappling with long term conditions. We apply the methodology of interpretive description for this research. ID involves the application of Thorne’s (2008) interpretive description framework to answer clinically focused research questions. The main purpose of our research is to produce a thoughtful interpretation of the conversations because this will explore perceptions and understanding about patient choice in clinical settings.
Results:
Data are currently being collected, and will be interpreted to make meaning of the participant conversations. Results from our research will be presented for the first time at the Sigma Theta Tau International congress in 2018. Interpreted meaning develops from working with an array of central ideas within nursing plus other disciplines as they relate to the research subject. Interpretive description encourages researchers to develop findings that are focused and yet eclectic, data permitting.
Conclusion:
Final findings and conclusions will be presented for the first time at the Sigma Theta Tau International congress in 2018.