The three components of EBP include clinical expertise, best evidence, and patient preference. Often, patient preference and clinical expertise are at odds with each other. Describe a scenario where you might need to mediate this issue and what is the solution when this occurs. May use attached article if you find it helpful. 1 page, 2 sources. APA.

Introduction

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is an approach to healthcare that integrates clinical expertise, the best available research evidence, and patient preferences to guide clinical decision making. While all three components are crucial for providing the highest quality care, there may be instances where patient preferences and clinical expertise are in conflict. This paper will discuss a scenario where this issue arises and propose a solution based on the principles of EBP.

Scenario

Imagine a scenario where a patient diagnosed with a chronic illness is receiving treatment from a healthcare provider who has extensive clinical expertise in managing the condition. The healthcare provider believes that the most effective treatment for the patient is a specific medication, as demonstrated by numerous research studies. However, the patient has reservations about taking medication and expresses a strong preference for exploring alternative therapies or lifestyle modifications.

Mediating the Issue

When patient preference and clinical expertise are at odds, it is important to approach the situation from a collaborative and patient-centered perspective. The first step in mediating this issue is to engage in open and honest communication with the patient. The healthcare provider should take the time to understand the patient’s concerns, values, and beliefs related to the proposed treatment. This can be accomplished through active listening, empathy, and asking open-ended questions to gain insight into the patient’s perspective.

Once the patient’s concerns are understood, the healthcare provider can share their clinical expertise and provide the best available evidence regarding the proposed treatment. This can include discussing the benefits, risks, and potential outcomes of the recommended approach. It is essential to present the evidence in a clear and understandable manner, avoiding jargon and technical language that may confuse or intimidate the patient.

Solution

In cases where patient preference and clinical expertise are in conflict, the solution lies in shared decision making. Shared decision making is a collaborative process that involves the patient and healthcare provider working together to make decisions based on the best available evidence and the patient’s values and preferences (Makoul & Clayman, 2006). In this scenario, the healthcare provider can present the patient with different treatment options, including the recommended medication and alternative therapies or lifestyle modifications suggested by the patient.

The healthcare provider should explain the potential benefits and risks of each option, as well as the level of evidence supporting their efficacy. Additionally, they should ensure that the patient understands the potential consequences of not receiving treatment or delaying treatment. This information should be presented in clear, concise, and unbiased terms, allowing the patient to make an informed decision.

During the shared decision-making process, it is vital for the healthcare provider to actively involve the patient in the discussion and encourage their input. The provider should create a safe and non-judgmental environment where the patient feels comfortable expressing their preferences and concerns. The provider should also be prepared to address any misconceptions or misunderstandings the patient may have about the recommended treatment or alternative options.

By engaging in shared decision making, the goal is to reach a treatment plan that both the patient and healthcare provider agree upon. This plan should take into consideration the patient’s preferences and values, aligning them with the best available evidence and the healthcare provider’s clinical expertise. In some cases, compromises may need to be made, such as combining elements of the recommended treatment with alternative therapies or lifestyle modifications.

Conclusion

In the complex landscape of healthcare, patient preferences and clinical expertise may clash. However, through open communication, shared decision making, and a patient-centered approach, these conflicts can be effectively mediated. Ultimately, the goal is to find a treatment plan that is evidence-based, respects the patient’s values and preferences, and maximizes the likelihood of positive outcomes. By leveraging the principles of EBP, healthcare providers can navigate these situations and provide personalized, high-quality care to their patients.