liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A preference for dialogue: exploring the influence of patient preferences on clinical decision making and treatment in primary care physiotherapy
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Narhalsan Res and Dev Primary Hlth Care, Sweden; Univ Gothenburg, Sweden.
Narhalsan Res and Dev Primary Hlth Care, Sweden; Univ Gothenburg, Sweden.
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8612-583X
Show others and affiliations
2019 (English)In: European Journal of Physiotherapy, ISSN 2167-9169, E-ISSN 2167-9177, Vol. 21, no 2, p. 107-114Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Eliciting and considering patients preferences is essential to any clinical encounter and to good, high quality health care. Little research exists on how preferences are accommodated in decision making and how they influence treatment and rehabilitation. Aims: To explore perceptions of patients with musculoskeletal pain regarding how their preferences were accommodated in clinical decision making and influenced their rehabilitation, and whether their preferences changed during their rehabilitation. Methods: Qualitative interview study. Results: Participants preferences had, for the most part, influenced both choice of treatment and rehabilitation as a whole. While preferences were expressed to various extents, and largely perceived to be accommodated in the decision process, a good dialogue was considered essential for collaborative rehabilitation. Treatment decisions were to a large extent made jointly by the physiotherapist and the patient. Regardless of the strength of the preferences, participants appreciated the dialogue with the physiotherapist and the opportunity to discuss treatment options. The participants described how the physiotherapy episode of care had influenced their perceptions of and preferences for different treatment methods. Conclusions: The findings emphasise the importance of eliciting patient preferences, two-way communication and discussing treatment options, in order to stimulate collaborative rehabilitation.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD , 2019. Vol. 21, no 2, p. 107-114
Keywords [en]
Rehabilitation; musculoskeletal pain; physical therapy; shared decision making; primary health care; qualitative research
National Category
Physiotherapy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-159078DOI: 10.1080/21679169.2018.1496474ISI: 000473828200007OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-159078DiVA, id: diva2:1338404
Note

Funding Agencies|Local Research and Development Council of Gothenburg and Sodra Bohuslan; Linkoping University

Available from: 2019-07-22 Created: 2019-07-22 Last updated: 2025-02-11

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Bernhardsson, SusanneJohansson, KajsaÖberg, Birgitta
By organisation
Division of PhysiotherapyFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
In the same journal
European Journal of Physiotherapy
Physiotherapy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 275 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf