please provide a response for both 

Part 1

Your response to your peers by extending, refuting/correcting, or adding additional nuance to their posts.

Decision Making

Decision Making Discuss the pros and cons of each of these models and the problems that are best suited for the various methods. Paternalistic Once a doctor decides for a patient deprived of clear agreement of patient, it is called paternalism. The specialists trust that the decisions are according to the interests of patients.

Pros

Doctor or manager gets the strength to rule from information that they can make decisions for team and patients feeling satisfied and important.

Various decisions can be made with the top interests of patients and workers into deliberations.

There is open communication between workers and managers or the patient and doctor would keep the patients and workers feeling satisfied and important.

Cons

The patients or workers would rely on the doctor which might cause enhance in crucial supervision for completing things in a proper and timely way.

Neglecting the choices of patients (Hou et al., 2019).

• Worst decisions from the dissatisfaction of patient and worker. Issue suited to the model includes an emergency condition where there is a requirement of instant action.
• Informative
• The chief goal of the relationship between patient and physician to get knowledge regarding the patient for distributing pertinent data to the patient for permitting conversant decisions that comprise alternatives, benefits, risks, and medical interference (Chiong et al., 2021).

Pros

Autonomy of patient.

• Consultation with others once there is a lack of skills or knowledge.
• Delivering facts and determining treatments for different options.
• Defined values of the patient.

Sustaining competency in expertise zones.

Cons

The head nurse supervisor or doctor will not be capable to practice their required skills and knowledge.

Healthcare specialists and physicians will not be capable to liable for findings as an outcome of the decision of patients.

Issue appropriate for the model shows that cancer patients illustrated distinct treatments available for health conditions.

• Shared Decision-making
• It permits patients and doctors to make the best decision related to health while discussing the conditions, preferences, and values of patients. The process can be utilized to instruct decisions regarding therapies, investigations, and screening as compared to steps added to consultation.
• Pros
• Decrease in conflict-related to the decision.
• Improvement in communication between doctor and patient.

Increase in accuracy of risk perception (Pieterse et al., 2019).

Improvement in patient knowledge.

• Capable preferences and evidence of patient to be combined into consultation.
• Cons

Competition between people who desire to win the choice. Issue best suited to model shows that patients require to enhance in acquiescence to healthcare as well as enhance at healthcare price including insights as well as feedback from stakeholders, patients, and nurses.

Determine which method has the strongest possibility of resulting in permanent change

The technique that has the robust probability of ensuing non-temporary modification includes shared decision-making, as it empowers patients and staff which is required to deliver a continuum of change and care. Shared decision-making confirms that people are supported to make decisions that are correct for them (Legare et al., 2018). It is an interactive procedure by which the doctor provisions the patient to reach a verdict regarding treatment. Once staff and patients are included and get engaged in decision-making then they contribute to distinct modifications introduced by hospice. Therefore, shared decision-making is examined as a trademark of better clinical practice, as it increases the activation and engagement of patients. It is also advocated for clinical instructions and healthcare strategies.

References

Hou, B., Hong, J., Zhu, K., & Zhou, Y. (2019). Paternalistic leadership and innovation: the moderating effect of environmental dynamism. European Journal of Innovation Management. .

Pieterse, A. H., Stiggelbout, A. M., &Montori, V. M. (2019). Shared decision-making and the importance of time. Jama, 322(1), 25-26.

• Below I have 2 posts please provide a response for both. 150 words each with reference.
• Part 2
• Your response to your peers by extending, refuting/correcting, or adding additional nuance to their posts.
• Decision-Making Process
• With the paternalistic decision-making model, people tend to feel as though the situation they are intends to be democratic since workers are required to discuss as well as comment and their questions are responded to. Nevertheless, the decision is based on the person at the top. This form of decision-making is effective only when dealing with an individual whose freedom of choice is seriously impaired. With this model, the majority of the decisions are made with the employees’ best interests considered. The manager is provided with the power to rule from the idea that they have the ability to make decisions for the team which enhances trust as well as loyalty with the workers. However, this form of decision-making is wrong sometimes and tends to interfere with an individual’s autonomy. What do I mean by this? May exist the case in which the participants do not come to an agreement all at once, and if that’s so, the “leader” will decide for all of them attempting against the right of autonomy of those few individuals that did not agree at first. (Driever, Stiggerlbout, & Brand, 2020).

Informative decision-making

The informative decision-making model is mainly used when the choices that people have to make are related to the decision topic. It mainly involves assessing potential outcomes, benefits as well as risks related to every option. With informative decision-making, people tend to have a sense of self-confidence, reduced anxiety and feelings of conflict on one’s decision. However, this form of decision-making tends to require too much time. The decision to be made and the whole process it entails requires time to listen to all people and identify the most effective decision to make (El Miedany et al., 2019).

• Shared decision-making

The shared decision-making method involves the healthcare team collaboration to decide the approach to use on the patients’ plan of care. It mainly involves selecting tests as well as treatment in regard to evidence as well as the individual’s individual preferences, beliefs as well as values. Shared decision-making mainly involves allowing evidence and patients’ preferences to be included in a consultation enhancing patient knowledge, risk perception accuracy, patient-clinician communication, and minimizing decisional conflict. However, with this type of decision-making, the majority of the patients do not wish to take part in decisions, therefore uncertainties inherent in medical care tend to be dangerous. This is not appropriate to offer information on the potential risks as well as benefits of all treatment choices. Additionally, maximizing patient involvement in decision-making may result in increased demand for inappropriate, expensive as well as dangerous procedures that might undermine the equitable allocation of healthcare resources (Driever, Stiggerlbout, & Brand, 2020).

The method that has the strongest possibility of resulting in permanent change

The informative decision-making model has the possibility of resulting in permanent change, and this happens as a result of detailed consideration of a set of options. The decision made considers each person’s desires and thus it tends to fit every person’s needs. Informed decision majors on the risks and benefits involved in the decision-making process. When making a decision using the informative decision-making model, patience, objective thinking, accounting for unpredictability, and preparation for failures are considered. This model identifies effective ways to overcome obstacles, accommodate various perspectives as well as enhance the decision-making capacity (Metcalfe, 2018).

References

Driever, E. M., Stiggelbout, A. M., & Brand, P. L. (2020). Shared decision making: Physicians’ preferred role, usual role, and their perception of its key components. Patient Education and Counseling, 103(1), 77-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2019.08.004

El Miedany, Y., El Gaafary, M., Lotfy, H., El Aroussy, N., Mekkawy, D., Nasef, S. I., Farag, Y., Almedany, S., Wassif, G., & PRINTO Egypt. (2019). Shared decision-making aid for juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Moving from informative patient education to interactive critical thinking. Clinical Rheumatology, 38(11), 3217-3225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-019-04687-y

Metcalfe, S. A. (2018). Genetic counselling, patient education, and informed decision-making in the genomic era. Seminars in Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 23(2), 142-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.siny.2017.11.010