title: Users' and health professionals' values in relation to a psychiatric intervention: the case of psychiatric advance directives.
abstract: Although clinical and organisational benefits have been expected from Psychiatric Advance Directives (PADs), their take-up rates remain low and their evaluation disappointing. The endorsement of PADs by stakeholders is decisive for their use and understanding stakeholders' preferences for implementation is crucial. A Multinomial Discrete Choice analysis was carried out of options for designing, completing, and honouring PADs, with a view to enhancing user autonomy, therapeutic alliance, care coordination, and feasibility. Although autonomy underlies the whole process, the criteria determining options varied with the stage of the intervention. These criteria should be taken into account in future PAD intervention and evaluation processes.
authors.affiliation: Institute of Health and Society (IRSS), Université catholique de Louvain, B1.30.15, Clos Chapelle-Aux-Champs, 30, 1200, Brussels, Belgium, pablo.nicaise@uclouvain.be.
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Nicaise
authors.forename: V E
authors.initials: VE
authors.lastname: Soto
authors.forename: V
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Dubois
authors.forename: V
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Lorant
mesh_terms: D016223:Advance Directives / Q000523:psychology*; D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D001294:Attitude to Health; D001530:Belgium; D002755:Choice Behavior; D017144:Focus Groups; D006801:Humans; D016015:Logistic Models; D001523:Mental Disorders / Q000628:therapy*; D016017:Odds Ratio; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D011369:Professional-Patient Relations; D011570:Psychiatry; D011584:Psychology; D036301:Qualitative Research; D012947:Social Work