The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration what do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do?

Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration what do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do?
Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration what do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do?

Treatment Escalation Plans (TEPs) are paper and electronic components of patients' clinical record that are intended to encourage patients and caregivers to contribute in advance to decisions about treatment escalation and de-escalation at times of loss of capacity. There is now a voluminous literature on patient decision-making, but in this qualitative study of British clinicians preparing to implement a new TEP, we focus on the ways that they understood it as much more than a device to promote patient awareness of the potential for pathophysiological deterioration and to elicit their preferences about care. Working through the lens of Callon's notion of agencements, and elements of May and Finch's Normalisation Process Theory, we show how clinicians saw the TEP as an organising device that enabled translation work to elicit individual preferences and so mitigate risks associated with decision-making under stress; and transportation work to make possible procedures that would transport agreed patterns of collective action around organisations and across their boundaries and to mitigate risks that resulted from relational and informational fragmentation. The TEP promoted these shifts by making possible the restructuring of negotiated obligations between patients, caregivers, and professionals, and by restructuring practice governance through promoting rules and resources that would form expectations of professional behaviour and organisational activity.

Awareness contexts, Goals of care, Performativity, Shared-decision-making, Status passage, UK
0277-9536
May, Carl
17697f8d-98f6-40d3-9cc0-022f04009ae4
Myall, Michelle
0604ba0f-75c2-4783-9afe-aa54bf81513f
Lund, Susi
f0cbe041-fa1e-45bc-ad2c-f4ccb9e640e5
Campling, Natasha
0e0410b0-a9cd-486d-a51f-20d80df04791
Bogle, Sarah
edae2c50-f030-419e-b71d-71f73a7cc75b
Dace, Sally
617290ee-3839-45e1-81ef-35c3220920c7
Richardson, Alison
3db30680-aa47-43a5-b54d-62d10ece17b7
May, Carl
17697f8d-98f6-40d3-9cc0-022f04009ae4
Myall, Michelle
0604ba0f-75c2-4783-9afe-aa54bf81513f
Lund, Susi
f0cbe041-fa1e-45bc-ad2c-f4ccb9e640e5
Campling, Natasha
0e0410b0-a9cd-486d-a51f-20d80df04791
Bogle, Sarah
edae2c50-f030-419e-b71d-71f73a7cc75b
Dace, Sally
617290ee-3839-45e1-81ef-35c3220920c7
Richardson, Alison
3db30680-aa47-43a5-b54d-62d10ece17b7

May, Carl, Myall, Michelle, Lund, Susi, Campling, Natasha, Bogle, Sarah, Dace, Sally and Richardson, Alison (2020) Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration what do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do? Social Science and Medicine, 258, [113143]. (doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113143).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Treatment Escalation Plans (TEPs) are paper and electronic components of patients' clinical record that are intended to encourage patients and caregivers to contribute in advance to decisions about treatment escalation and de-escalation at times of loss of capacity. There is now a voluminous literature on patient decision-making, but in this qualitative study of British clinicians preparing to implement a new TEP, we focus on the ways that they understood it as much more than a device to promote patient awareness of the potential for pathophysiological deterioration and to elicit their preferences about care. Working through the lens of Callon's notion of agencements, and elements of May and Finch's Normalisation Process Theory, we show how clinicians saw the TEP as an organising device that enabled translation work to elicit individual preferences and so mitigate risks associated with decision-making under stress; and transportation work to make possible procedures that would transport agreed patterns of collective action around organisations and across their boundaries and to mitigate risks that resulted from relational and informational fragmentation. The TEP promoted these shifts by making possible the restructuring of negotiated obligations between patients, caregivers, and professionals, and by restructuring practice governance through promoting rules and resources that would form expectations of professional behaviour and organisational activity.

Text
Managing patient preferences and clinical responses in acute pathophysiological deterioration what do clinicians think treatment escalation plans do - Accepted Manuscript
Download (83kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 11 June 2020
e-pub ahead of print date: 20 June 2020
Published date: August 2020
Additional Information: Funding Information: CRM, SB, NC, AC, SL, MM and AR were supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) through the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care for Wessex (NIHR CLAHRC Wessex) programme. SD was an independent patient representative in this study. Funding Information: This paper presents independent work supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Publisher Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s)
Keywords: Awareness contexts, Goals of care, Performativity, Shared-decision-making, Status passage, UK

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 441776
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/441776
ISSN: 0277-9536
PURE UUID: 31e0e202-98f0-40e7-ad01-2dea33ae6411
ORCID for Carl May: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-0451-2690
ORCID for Michelle Myall: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-8733-7412
ORCID for Natasha Campling: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-4158-7894
ORCID for Sarah Bogle: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-6651-3843
ORCID for Alison Richardson: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-3127-5755

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 26 Jun 2020 16:42
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 05:39

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Carl May ORCID iD
Author: Michelle Myall ORCID iD
Author: Susi Lund
Author: Sarah Bogle ORCID iD
Author: Sally Dace

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×