Service of SURF
© 2025 SURF
Gedeelde besluitvorming is in de praktijk niet zo eenvoudig. SDM vraagt van zowel de verpleegkundige als de patiënt eigenschappen die niet vanzelfsprekend aanwezig zijn. De verpleegkundige dient in staat te zijn verschillende mogelijkheden met de voor- en nadelen te presenteren en daarnaast de patiënt de ruimte te geven een keuze te maken die het best bij hem past. Deze werkwijze past goed in een persoonsgerichte visie, waarin gedeelde besluitvorming of samen beslissen en empowerment belangrijke elementen zijn.
LINK
Rationale, aims, and objectives: The current study and previous research have called the six-component model of Lützen's 30-item Moral Sensitivity Questionnaire (MSQ) into question. For this reason, we re-examined the construct validity of this instrument. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, which was based on a convenience sample of Dutch nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs), we tested the validity of MSQ items using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA, respectively). Results: The EFA revealed a two-component model, which was then tested as a target model with CFA and was found to have good model fit. Some items were correlated with two uncorrelated latent constructs, which we labelled as “paternalistic” and “deliberate” attitudes towards patients. Conclusions: As in previous studies, the analyses in the current study, which was conducted among PAs and NPs, did not reveal six dimensions for the 30 items. Two new latent dimensions of moral sensitivity were psychometrically tested and confirmed. These two components relate to studies investigating ethical behaviour, and they can be used to describe the moral climate in healthcare organizations. The scales are indicators of the extent to which health professionals behave in a deliberate (sensitive) or paternalistic (insensitive) manner towards the opinions of patients within the context of medical decision-making.
The high prevalence and burden of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) is largely attributable to unhealthy lifestyle factors such as smoking, alcohol consumption, physical inactivity and unhealthy food habits. Prevention of CVD, through the promotion of healthy lifestyles, appears to be a Sisyphean task for healthcare professionals, as the root causes of an unhealthy lifestyle lie largely outside their scope. Since most lifestyle choices are habitual and a response to environmental cues, rather than rational and deliberate choices, nationwide policies targeting the context in which lifestyle behaviours occur may be highly effective in the prevention of CVD. In this point-of-view article, we emphasise the need for government policies beyond those mentioned in the National Prevention Agreement in the Netherlands to effectively reduce the CVD risk, and we address the commonly raised concerns regarding ‘paternalism’.
MULTIFILE