Abstract
Study Design:
Qualitative study using individual in-depth interviews.
Objective:
To explore the roles of patients, their caregivers and doctors when making decisions on the method of bladder drainage after spinal cord injury (SCI).
Setting:
Five public hospitals in Malaysia.
Methods:
Semistructured (one-to-one) interviews with 17 male patients with SCI, 4 caregivers and 10 rehabilitation professionals.
Results:
Eight themes describing the respective decisional roles of patients, their caregivers and doctors emerged from the analysis: patient's right and responsibilities, patient as an informed decision maker, forced to accept decision; surrogate decision maker, silent partner; doctor knows best, over-ride patient's decision, or reluctant decision maker. Both patients and doctors acknowledged the importance of patient autonomy but not all patients had the chance to practice it. Some felt that they were forced to accept the doctor's decision and even alleged that the doctor refused to accept their decision. Doctors considered the caregiver as the decision maker in cases that involved minors, elderly and those with tetraplegia. Some patients considered bladder problems an embarrassing subject to discuss with their caregivers and did not want their involvement. Doctors were described as knowledgeable and were trusted by patients and their caregivers to make the most appropriate option. Some doctors were happy to assume this role whereas some others saw themselves only as information providers.
Conclusions:
A paternalistic model is prevalent in this decision-making process and there is a discrepancy between patients' preferred and actual decisional roles.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Bothig R, Hirschfeld S, Thietje R . Quality of life and urological morbidity in tetraplegics with artificial ventilation managed with suprapubic or intermittent catheterisation. Spinal cord 2012; 50: 247–251.
Cameron AP, Wallner LP, Forchheimer MB, Clemens JQ, Dunn RL, Rodriguez G et al. Medical and psychosocial complications associated with method of bladder management after traumatic spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011; 92: 449–456.
El-Masri WS, Chong T, Kyriakider AE, Wang D . Long-term follow-up study of outcomes of bladder management in spinal cord injury patients under the care of the Midlands Centre for Spinal Injuries in Oswestry. Spinal cord 2012; 50: 14–21.
Ramm D, Kane R . A qualitative study exploring the emotional responses of female patients learning to perform clean intermittent self-catheterization. J Clin Nurs 2011; 20: 3152–3162.
Kralik B, Seymour L, Eastwood S, Koch T . Managing the self: living with an indwelling urinary catheter. J Clin Nurs 2007; 16: 177–185.
McConville A . Patients' experiences of clean intermittent catheterisation. Nurs Times 2002; 98: 55–56.
Sand A, Karlberg I, Kreuter M . Spinal cord injured persons’ conceptions of hospital care, rehabilitation, and a new life situation. Scand J Occup Ther 2006; 13: 183–192.
Stacey D, Bennett C, Barry MJ, Col NF, Eden KB, Holmes-Rovner M et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions Update in. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; 1: CD001431.
Coulter A, Ellins J . Effectiveness of strategies for informing, educating, and involving patients. BMJ 2007; 335: 24–27.
Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T . Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model. Soc Sci Med 1999; 49: 651–661.
Sandelowski M . Focus on research methods whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing and Health 2000; 23: 334–340.
Janis IL, Mann L . Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice and commitment. Free Press: New York, NY, USA. 1977.
Morse J, Field P . Qualitative research methods for health professionals. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. 1995.
Braun V, Clarke V . Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006; 3: 77–101.
Protheroe J, Brooks H, Chew-Graham C, Gardner C, Rogers A . 'Permisision to participate?' A qualitative study of participation in patients with differing socio-economic backgrounds. J Health Psychol 2013; 18: 1046–1055.
Fraenkel L, McGraw S . What are essential elements to enable patient participation in medical decision making? J Gen Intern Med 2007; 22: 614–619.
Carpenter C . The experience of spinal cord injury: the individual's perspective-Implications for rehabilitation practice. Phys Ther 1994; 74: 614–628.
Lund ML, Tamm M, Branholm I . Patients' perceptions of their participation in rehabilitation planning and professionals’ view of their strategies to encourage it. Occup Ther Int 2001; 8: 151–167.
Kraetschmer N, Sharpe N, Urowitz S, Deber RB . How does trust affect patoent preference for participation in decision-making? Health Expect 2004; 7: 317–326.
Shaw C, Logan K, Webber I, Broome L, Samuel S . Effect of clean intermittent self-catheterization on quality of life: a qualitative study. J Adv Nurs 2008; 61: 641–650.
Koch T, Kralik D, Eastwood S, Schofield A . Breaking the silence: women living with multiple sclerosis and urinary incontinence. Int J Nurs Pract 2001; 7: 16–23.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Director of Health Malaysia for permission to publish this paper. The study was funded by the BKP grant from University of Malaya, Malaysia; BK002-2012A.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Engkasan, J., Ng, C. & Low, W. Who decides? A qualitative study on the decisional roles of patients, their caregivers and doctors on the method of bladder drainage after spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 53, 130–134 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2014.199
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.2014.199
This article is cited by
-
Strengths, gaps, and future directions on the landscape of ethics-related research for spinal cord injury
Spinal Cord (2023)
-
The experiences of individuals with cervical spinal cord injury and their family during post-injury care in non-specialised and specialised units in UK
BMC Health Services Research (2020)
