Shared decision making in endocrinology: present and future directions.

Science.gov (United States)

Rodriguez-Gutierrez, Rene; Gionfriddo, Michael R; Ospina, Naykky Singh; Maraka, Spyridoula; Tamhane, Shrikant; Montori, Victor M; Brito, Juan P

2016-08-01

In medicine and endocrinology, there are few clinical circumstances in which clinicians can accurately predict what is best for their patients. As a result, patients and clinicians frequently have to make decisions about which there is uncertainty. Uncertainty results from limitations in the research evidence, unclear patient preferences, or an inability to predict how treatments will fit into patients' daily lives. The work that patients and clinicians do together to address the patient's situation and engage in a deliberative dialogue about reasonable treatment options is often called shared decision making. Decision aids are evidence-based tools that facilitate this process. Shared decision making is a patient-centred approach in which clinicians share information about the benefits, harms, and burden of different reasonable diagnostic and treatment options, and patients explain what matters to them in view of their particular values, preferences, and personal context. Beyond the ethical argument in support of this approach, decision aids have been shown to improve patients' knowledge about the available options, accuracy of risk estimates, and decisional comfort. Decision aids also promote patient participation in the decision-making process. Despite accumulating evidence from clinical trials, policy support, and expert recommendations in endocrinology practice guidelines, shared decision making is still not routinely implemented in endocrine practice. Additional work is needed to enrich the number of available tools and to implement them in practice workflows. Also, although the evidence from randomised controlled trials favours the use of this shared decision making in other settings, populations, and illnesses, the effect of this approach has been studied in a few endocrine disorders. Future pragmatic trials are needed to explore the effect and feasibility of shared decision making implementation into routine endocrinology and primary care practice. With the

Perceptions of shared decision making and decision aids among rural primary care clinicians.

Science.gov (United States)

King, Valerie J; Davis, Melinda M; Gorman, Paul N; Rugge, J Bruin; Fagnan, L J

2012-01-01

Shared decision making (SDM) and decision aids (DAs) increase patients' involvement in health care decisions and enhance satisfaction with their choices. Studies of SDM and DAs have primarily occurred in academic centers and large health systems, but most primary care is delivered in smaller practices, and over 20% of Americans live in rural areas, where poverty, disease prevalence, and limited access to care may increase the need for SDM and DAs. To explore perceptions and practices of rural primary care clinicians regarding SDM and DAs. Cross-sectional survey. Setting and Participants Primary care clinicians affiliated with the Oregon Rural Practice-based Research Network. Surveys were returned by 181 of 231 eligible participants (78%); 174 could be analyzed. Two-thirds of participants were physicians, 84% practiced family medicine, and 55% were male. Sixty-five percent of respondents were unfamiliar with the term shared decision making, but following definition, 97% reported that they found the approach useful for conditions with multiple treatment options. Over 90% of clinicians perceived helping patients make decisions regarding chronic pain and health behavior change as moderate/hard in difficulty. Although 69% of respondents preferred that patients play an equal role in making decisions, they estimate that this happens only 35% of the time. Time was reported as the largest barrier to engaging in SDM (63%). Respondents were receptive to using DAs to facilitate SDM in print- (95%) or web-based formats (72%), and topic preference varied by clinician specialty and decision difficulty. Rural clinicians recognized the value of SDM and were receptive to using DAs in multiple formats. Integration of DAs to facilitate SDM in routine patient care may require addressing practice operation and reimbursement.

[Shared decision-making in acute psychiatric medicine : Contraindication or a challenge?

Science.gov (United States)

Heres, S; Hamann, J

2017-09-01

The concept of shared decision-making (SDM) has existed since the 1990s in multiple fields of somatic medicine but has only been poorly applied in psychiatric clinical routine despite broad acceptance and promising outcomes in clinical studies on its positive effects. The concept itself and its practicability in mental health are carefully assessed and strategies for its future implementation in psychiatric medicine are presented in this article. Ongoing clinical studies probing some of those strategies are further outlined. On top of the ubiquitous shortage of time in clinical routine, psychiatrists report their concern about patients' limited abilities in sharing decisions and their own fear of potentially harmful decisions resulting from a shared process. Misinterpretation of shared decision-making restricting the health care professional to rather an informed choice scenario and their own adhesion to the traditional paternalistic decision-making approach further add to SDM's underutilization. Those hurdles could be overcome by communication skill workshops for all mental health care professionals, including nursing personnels, psychologists, social workers and physicians, as well as the use of decision aids and training courses for patients to motivate and empower them in sharing decisions with the medical staff. By this, the patient-centered treatment approach demanded by guidelines, carers and users could be further facilitated in psychiatric clinical routine.

Mapping Perceptions of Lupus Medication Decision-Making Facilitators: The Importance of Patient Context.

Science.gov (United States)

Qu, Haiyan; Shewchuk, Richard M; Alarcón, Graciela; Fraenkel, Liana; Leong, Amye; Dall'Era, Maria; Yazdany, Jinoos; Singh, Jasvinder A

2016-12-01

Numerous factors can impede or facilitate patients' medication decision-making and adherence to physicians' recommendations. Little is known about how patients and physicians jointly view issues that affect the decision-making process. Our objective was to derive an empirical framework of patient-identified facilitators to lupus medication decision-making from key stakeholders (including 15 physicians, 5 patients/patient advocates, and 8 medical professionals) using a patient-centered cognitive mapping approach. We used nominal group patient panels to identify facilitators to lupus treatment decision-making. Stakeholders independently sorted the identified facilitators (n = 98) based on their similarities and rated the importance of each facilitator in patient decision-making. Data were analyzed using multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis. A cognitive map was derived that represents an empirical framework of facilitators for lupus treatment decisions from multiple stakeholders' perspectives. The facilitator clusters were 1) hope for a normal/healthy life, 2) understand benefits and effectiveness of taking medications, 3) desire to minimize side effects, 4) medication-related data, 5) medication effectiveness for "me," 6) family focus, 7) confidence in physician, 8) medication research, 9) reassurance about medication, and 10) medication economics. Consideration of how different stakeholders perceive the relative importance of lupus medication decision-making clusters is an important step toward improving patient-physician communication and effective shared decision-making. The empirically derived framework of medication decision-making facilitators can be used as a guide to develop a lupus decision aid that focuses on improving physician-patient communication. © 2016, American College of Rheumatology.

Shared decision-making and patient autonomy.

Science.gov (United States)

Sandman, Lars; Munthe, Christian

2009-01-01

In patient-centred care, shared decision-making is advocated as the preferred form of medical decision-making. Shared decision-making is supported with reference to patient autonomy without abandoning the patient or giving up the possibility of influencing how the patient is benefited. It is, however, not transparent how shared decision-making is related to autonomy and, in effect, what support autonomy can give shared decision-making. In the article, different forms of shared decision-making are analysed in relation to five different aspects of autonomy: (1) self-realisation; (2) preference satisfaction; (3) self-direction; (4) binary autonomy of the person; (5) gradual autonomy of the person. It is argued that both individually and jointly these aspects will support the models called shared rational deliberative patient choice and joint decision as the preferred versions from an autonomy perspective. Acknowledging that both of these models may fail, the professionally driven best interest compromise model is held out as a satisfactory second-best choice.

Promoting Shared Decision Making in Disorders of Sex Development (DSD): Decision Aids and Support Tools.

Science.gov (United States)

Siminoff, L A; Sandberg, D E

2015-05-01

Specific complaints and grievances from adult patients with disorders of sex development (DSD), and their advocates center around the lack of information or misinformation they were given about their condition and feeling stigmatized and shamed by the secrecy surrounding their condition and its management. Many also attribute poor sexual function to damaging genital surgery and/or repeated, insensitive genital examinations. These reports suggest the need to reconsider the decision-making process for the treatment of children born with DSD. This paper proposes that shared decision making, an important concept in adult health care, be operationalized for the major decisions commonly encountered in DSD care and facilitated through the utilization of decision aids and support tools. This approach may help patients and their families make informed decisions that are better aligned with their personal values and goals. It may also lead to greater confidence in decision making with greater satisfaction and less regret. A brief review of the past and current approach to DSD decision making is provided, along with a review of shared decision making and decision aids and support tools. A case study explores the need and potential utility of this suggested new approach. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Development and field testing of a decision support tool to facilitate shared decision making in contraceptive counseling.

Science.gov (United States)

Dehlendorf, Christine; Fitzpatrick, Judith; Steinauer, Jody; Swiader, Lawrence; Grumbach, Kevin; Hall, Cara; Kuppermann, Miriam

2017-07-01

We developed and formatively evaluated a tablet-based decision support tool for use by women prior to a contraceptive counseling visit to help them engage in shared decision making regarding method selection. Drawing upon formative work around women's preferences for contraceptive counseling and conceptual understanding of health care decision making, we iteratively developed a storyboard and then digital prototypes, based on best practices for decision support tool development. Pilot testing using both quantitative and qualitative data and cognitive testing was conducted. We obtained feedback from patient and provider advisory groups throughout the development process. Ninety-six percent of women who used the tool in pilot testing reported that it helped them choose a method, and qualitative interviews indicated acceptability of the tool's content and presentation. Compared to the control group, women who used the tool demonstrated trends toward increased likelihood of complete satisfaction with their method. Participant responses to cognitive testing were used in tool refinement. Our decision support tool appears acceptable to women in the family planning setting. Formative evaluation of the tool supports its utility among patients making contraceptive decisions, which can be further evaluated in a randomized controlled trial. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Development of shared decision-making resources to help inform difficult healthcare decisions: An example focused on dysvascular partial foot and transtibial amputations.

Science.gov (United States)

Quigley, Matthew; Dillon, Michael P; Fatone, Stefania

2018-02-01

Shared decision making is a consultative process designed to encourage patient participation in decision making by providing accurate information about the treatment options and supporting deliberation with the clinicians about treatment options. The process can be supported by resources such as decision aids and discussion guides designed to inform and facilitate often difficult conversations. As this process increases in use, there is opportunity to raise awareness of shared decision making and the international standards used to guide the development of quality resources for use in areas of prosthetic/orthotic care. To describe the process used to develop shared decision-making resources, using an illustrative example focused on decisions about the level of dysvascular partial foot amputation or transtibial amputation. Development process: The International Patient Decision Aid Standards were used to guide the development of the decision aid and discussion guide focused on decisions about the level of dysvascular partial foot amputation or transtibial amputation. Examples from these shared decision-making resources help illuminate the stages of development including scoping and design, research synthesis, iterative development of a prototype, and preliminary testing with patients and clinicians not involved in the development process. Lessons learnt through the process, such as using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards checklist and development guidelines, may help inform others wanting to develop similar shared decision-making resources given the applicability of shared decision making to many areas of prosthetic-/orthotic-related practice. Clinical relevance Shared decision making is a process designed to guide conversations that help patients make an informed decision about their healthcare. Raising awareness of shared decision making and the international standards for development of high-quality decision aids and discussion guides is important

Using Option Grids: steps toward shared decision-making for neonatal circumcision.

Science.gov (United States)

Fay, Mary; Grande, Stuart W; Donnelly, Kyla; Elwyn, Glyn

2016-02-01

To assess the impact, acceptability and feasibility of a short encounter tool designed to enhance the process of shared decision-making and parental engagement. We analyzed video-recordings of clinical encounters, half undertaken before and half after a brief intervention that trained four clinicians how to use Option Grids, using an observer-based measure of shared decision-making. We also analyzed semi-structured interviews conducted with the clinicians four weeks after their exposure to the intervention. Observer OPTION(5) scores were higher at post-intervention, with a mean of 33.9 (SD=23.5) compared to a mean of 16.1 (SD=7.1) for pre-intervention, a significant difference of 17.8 (95% CI: 2.4, 33.2). Prior to using the intervention, clinicians used a consent document to frame circumcision as a default practice. Encounters with the Option Grid conferred agency to both parents and clinicians, and facilitated shared decision-making. Clinician reported recognizing the tool's positive effect on their communication process. Tools such as Option Grids have the potential to make it easier for clinicians to achieve shared decision-making. Encounter tools have the potential to change practice. More research is needed to test their feasibility in routine practice. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Shared Decision Making for Better Schools.

Science.gov (United States)

Brost, Paul

2000-01-01

Delegating decision making to those closest to implementation can result in better decisions, more support for improvement initiatives, and increased student performance. Shared decision making depends on capable school leadership, a professional community, instructional guidance mechanisms, knowledge and skills, information sharing, power, and…

Option Grids to facilitate shared decision making for patients with Osteoarthritis of the knee: protocol for a single site, efficacy trial.

Science.gov (United States)

Marrin, Katy; Wood, Fiona; Firth, Jill; Kinsey, Katharine; Edwards, Adrian; Brain, Kate E; Newcombe, Robert G; Nye, Alan; Pickles, Timothy; Hawthorne, Kamila; Elwyn, Glyn

2014-04-07

Despite policy interest, an ethical imperative, and evidence of the benefits of patient decision support tools, the adoption of shared decision making (SDM) in day-to-day clinical practice remains slow and is inhibited by barriers that include culture and attitudes; resources and time pressures. Patient decision support tools often require high levels of health and computer literacy. Option Grids are one-page evidence-based summaries of the available condition-specific treatment options, listing patients' frequently asked questions. They are designed to be sufficiently brief and accessible enough to support a better dialogue between patients and clinicians during routine consultations. This paper describes a study to assess whether an Option Grid for osteoarthritis of the knee (OA of the knee) facilitates SDM, and explores the use of Option Grids by patients disadvantaged by language or poor health literacy. This will be a stepped wedge exploratory trial involving 72 patients with OA of the knee referred from primary medical care to a specialist musculoskeletal service in Oldham. Six physiotherapists will sequentially join the trial and consult with six patients using usual care procedures. After a period of brief training in using the Option Grid, the same six physiotherapists will consult with six further patients using an Option Grid in the consultation. The primary outcome will be efficacy of the Option Grid in facilitating SDM as measured by observational scores using the OPTION scale. Comparisons will be made between patients who have received the Option Grid and those who received usual care. A Decision Quality Measure (DQM) will assess quality of decision making. The health literacy of patients will be measured using the REALM-R instrument. Consultations will be observed and audio-recorded. Interviews will be conducted with the physiotherapists, patients and any interpreters present to explore their views of using the Option Grid. Option Grids offer a

Shared learning in general practice--facilitators and barriers.

Science.gov (United States)

van de Mortel, Thea; Silberberg, Peter; Ahern, Christine

2013-03-01

Capacity for teaching in general practice clinics is limited. Shared learning sessions are one form of vertically integrated teaching that may ameliorate capacity constraints. This study sought to understand the perceptions of general practitioner supervisors, learners and practice staff of the facilitators of shared learning in general practice clinics. Using a grounded theory approach, semistructured interviews were conducted and analysed to generate a theory about the topic. Thirty-five stakeholders from nine general practices participated. Facilitators of shared learning included enabling factors such as small group facilitation skills, space, administrative support and technological resources; reinforcing factors such as targeted funding, and predisposing factors such as participant attributes. Views from multiple stakeholders suggest that the implementation of shared learning in general practice clinics would be supported by an ecological approach that addresses all these factors.

Implementing and evaluating shared decision making in oncology practice.

Science.gov (United States)

Kane, Heather L; Halpern, Michael T; Squiers, Linda B; Treiman, Katherine A; McCormack, Lauren A

2014-01-01

Engaging individuals with cancer in decision making about their treatments has received increased attention; shared decision making (SDM) has become a hallmark of patient-centered care. Although physicians indicate substantial interest in SDM, implementing SDM in cancer care is often complex; high levels of uncertainty may exist, and health care providers must help patients understand the potential risks versus benefits of different treatment options. However, patients who are more engaged in their health care decision making are more likely to experience confidence in and satisfaction with treatment decisions and increased trust in their providers. To implement SDM in oncology practice, physicians and other health care providers need to understand the components of SDM and the approaches to supporting and facilitating this process as part of cancer care. This review summarizes recent information regarding patient and physician factors that influence SDM for cancer care, outcomes resulting from successful SDM, and strategies for implementing SDM in oncology practice. We present a conceptual model illustrating the components of SDM in cancer care and provide recommendations for facilitating SDM in oncology practice. © 2014 American Cancer Society, Inc.

The role of depression pharmacogenetic decision support tools in shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Arandjelovic, Katarina; Eyre, Harris A; Lenze, Eric; Singh, Ajeet B; Berk, Michael; Bousman, Chad

2017-10-29

Patients discontinue antidepressant medications due to lack of knowledge, unrealistic expectations, and/or unacceptable side effects. Shared decision making (SDM) invites patients to play an active role in their treatment and may indirectly improve outcomes through enhanced engagement in care, adherence to treatment, and positive expectancy of medication outcomes. We believe decisional aids, such as pharmacogenetic decision support tools (PDSTs), facilitate SDM in the clinical setting. PDSTs may likewise predict drug tolerance and efficacy, and therefore adherence and effectiveness on an individual-patient level. There are several important ethical considerations to be navigated when integrating PDSTs into clinical practice. The field requires greater empirical research to demonstrate clinical utility, and the mechanisms thereof, as well as exploration of the ethical use of these technologies.

Shared Decision-Making for Nursing Practice: An Integrative Review.

Science.gov (United States)

Truglio-Londrigan, Marie; Slyer, Jason T

2018-01-01

Shared decision-making has received national and international interest by providers, educators, researchers, and policy makers. The literature on shared decision-making is extensive, dealing with the individual components of shared decision-making rather than a comprehensive process. This view of shared decision-making leaves healthcare providers to wonder how to integrate shared decision-making into practice. To understand shared decision-making as a comprehensive process from the perspective of the patient and provider in all healthcare settings. An integrative review was conducted applying a systematic approach involving a literature search, data evaluation, and data analysis. The search included articles from PubMed, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PsycINFO from 1970 through 2016. Articles included quantitative experimental and non-experimental designs, qualitative, and theoretical articles about shared decision-making between all healthcare providers and patients in all healthcare settings. Fifty-two papers were included in this integrative review. Three categories emerged from the synthesis: (a) communication/ relationship building; (b) working towards a shared decision; and (c) action for shared decision-making. Each major theme contained sub-themes represented in the proposed visual representation for shared decision-making. A comprehensive understanding of shared decision-making between the nurse and the patient was identified. A visual representation offers a guide that depicts shared decision-making as a process taking place during a healthcare encounter with implications for the continuation of shared decisions over time offering patients an opportunity to return to the nurse for reconsiderations of past shared decisions.

Shared Decision Making at the Limit of Viability: A Blueprint for Physician Action.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Thierry Daboval

Full Text Available To document interactions during the antenatal consultation between parents and neonatologist that parents linked to their satisfaction with their participation in shared decision making for their infant at risk of being born at the limit of viability.This multiple-case ethnomethodological qualitative research study, included mothers admitted for a threatened premature delivery between 200/7 and 266/7 weeks gestation, the father, and the staff neonatologist conducting the clinical antenatal consultation. Content analysis of an audiotaped post-antenatal consultation interview with parents obtained their satisfaction scores as well as their comments on physician actions that facilitated their desired participation.Five cases, each called a "system-infant at risk", included 10 parents and 6 neonatologists. From the interviews emerged a blueprint for action by physicians, including communication strategies that parents say facilitated their participation in decision making; such as building trustworthy physician-parent relationships, providing "balanced" information, offering choices, and allowing time to think.Parent descriptions indicate that the opportunity to participate to their satisfaction in the clinical antenatal consultation depends on how the physician interacts with them.The parent-identified communication strategies facilitate shared decision making regarding treatment in the best interest of the infant at risk to be born at the limit of viability.

Shared Decision Making at the Limit of Viability: A Blueprint for Physician Action

Science.gov (United States)

2016-01-01

Objective To document interactions during the antenatal consultation between parents and neonatologist that parents linked to their satisfaction with their participation in shared decision making for their infant at risk of being born at the limit of viability. Methods This multiple-case ethnomethodological qualitative research study, included mothers admitted for a threatened premature delivery between 200/7 and 266/7 weeks gestation, the father, and the staff neonatologist conducting the clinical antenatal consultation. Content analysis of an audiotaped post-antenatal consultation interview with parents obtained their satisfaction scores as well as their comments on physician actions that facilitated their desired participation. Results Five cases, each called a “system—infant at risk”, included 10 parents and 6 neonatologists. From the interviews emerged a blueprint for action by physicians, including communication strategies that parents say facilitated their participation in decision making; such as building trustworthy physician-parent relationships, providing "balanced" information, offering choices, and allowing time to think. Conclusion Parent descriptions indicate that the opportunity to participate to their satisfaction in the clinical antenatal consultation depends on how the physician interacts with them. Practice implications The parent-identified communication strategies facilitate shared decision making regarding treatment in the best interest of the infant at risk to be born at the limit of viability. PMID:27893823

Understanding patient perceptions of shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Shay, L Aubree; Lafata, Jennifer Elston

2014-09-01

This study aims to develop a conceptual model of patient-defined SDM, and understand what leads patients to label a specific, decision-making process as shared. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 23 primary care patients following a recent appointment. Patients were asked about the meaning of SDM and about specific decisions that they labeled as shared. Interviews were coded using qualitative content analysis. Patients' conceptual definition of SDM included four components of an interactive exchange prior to making the decision: both doctor and patient share information, both are open-minded and respectful, patient self-advocacy, and a personalized physician recommendation. Additionally, a long-term trusting relationship helps foster SDM. In contrast, when asked about a specific decision labeled as shared, patients described a range of interactions with the only commonality being that the two parties came to a mutually agreed-upon decision. There is no one-size-fits all process that leads patients to label a decision as shared. Rather, the outcome of "agreement" may be more important than the actual decision-making process for patients to label a decision as shared. Studies are needed to better understand how longitudinal communication between patient and physicians and patient self-advocacy behaviors affect patient perceptions of SDM. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

A multimethod analysis of shared decision-making in hospice interdisciplinary team meetings including family caregivers.

Science.gov (United States)

Washington, Karla T; Oliver, Debra Parker; Gage, L Ashley; Albright, David L; Demiris, George

2016-03-01

Much of the existing research on shared decision-making in hospice and palliative care focuses on the provider-patient dyad; little is known about shared decision-making that is inclusive of family members of patients with advanced disease. We sought to describe shared decision-making as it occurred in hospice interdisciplinary team meetings that included family caregivers as participants using video-conferencing technology. We conducted a multimethod study in which we used content and thematic analysis techniques to analyze video-recordings of hospice interdisciplinary team meetings (n = 100), individual interviews of family caregivers (n = 73) and hospice staff members (n = 78), and research field notes. Participants in the original studies from which data for this analysis were drawn were hospice family caregivers and staff members employed by one of five different community-based hospice agencies located in the Midwestern United States. Shared decision-making occurred infrequently in hospice interdisciplinary team meetings that included family caregivers. Barriers to shared decision-making included time constraints, communication skill deficits, unaddressed emotional needs, staff absences, and unclear role expectations. The hospice philosophy of care, current trends in healthcare delivery, the interdisciplinary nature of hospice teams, and the designation of a team leader/facilitator supported shared decision-making. The involvement of family caregivers in hospice interdisciplinary team meetings using video-conferencing technology creates a useful platform for shared decision-making; however, steps must be taken to transform family caregivers from meeting attendees to shared decision-makers. © The Author(s) 2015.

Shared decision making after severe stroke-How can we improve patient and family involvement in treatment decisions?

Science.gov (United States)

Visvanathan, Akila; Dennis, Martin; Mead, Gillian; Whiteley, William N; Lawton, Julia; Doubal, Fergus Neil

2017-12-01

People who are well may regard survival with disability as being worse than death. However, this is often not the case when those surviving with disability (e.g. stroke survivors) are asked the same question. Many routine treatments provided after an acute stroke (e.g. feeding via a tube) increase survival, but with disability. Therefore, clinicians need to support patients and families in making informed decisions about the use of these treatments, in a process termed shared decision making. This is challenging after acute stroke: there is prognostic uncertainty, patients are often too unwell to participate in decision making, and proxies may not know the patients' expressed wishes (i.e. values). Patients' values also change over time and in different situations. There is limited evidence on successful methods to facilitate this process. Changes targeted at components of shared decision making (e.g. decision aids to provide information and discussing patient values) increase patient satisfaction. How this influences decision making is unclear. Presumably, a "shared decision-making tool" that introduces effective changes at various stages in this process might be helpful after acute stroke. For example, by complementing professional judgement with predictions from prognostic models, clinicians could provide information that is more accurate. Decision aids that are personalized may be helpful. Further qualitative research can provide clinicians with a better understanding of patient values and factors influencing this at different time points after a stroke. The evaluation of this tool in its success to achieve outcomes consistent with patients' values may require more than one clinical trial.

[Evidence-based Risk and Benefit Communication for Shared Decision Making].

Science.gov (United States)

Nakayama, Takeo

2018-01-01

　Evidence-based medicine (EBM) can be defined as "the integration of the best research evidence with clinical expertise and a patient's unique values and circumstances". However, even with the best research evidence, many uncertainties can make clinical decisions difficult. As the social requirement of respecting patient values and preferences has been increasingly recognized, shared decision making (SDM) and consensus development between patients and clinicians have attracted attention. SDM is a process by which patients and clinicians make decisions and arrive at a consensus through interactive conversations and communications. During the process of SDM, patients and clinicians share information with each other on the goals they hope to achieve and responsibilities in meeting those goals. From the clinician's standpoint, information regarding the benefits and risks of potential treatment options based on current evidence and professional experience is provided to patients. From the patient's standpoint, information on personal values, preferences, and social roles is provided to clinicians. SDM is a sort of "wisdom" in the context of making autonomous decisions in uncertain, difficult situations through interactions and cooperation between patients and clinicians. Joint development of EBM and SDM will help facilitate patient-clinician relationships and improve the quality of healthcare.

'My kidneys, my choice, decision aid': supporting shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Fortnum, Debbie; Smolonogov, Tatiana; Walker, Rachael; Kairaitis, Luke; Pugh, Debbie

2015-06-01

For patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) who are progressing to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) a decision of whether to undertake dialysis or conservative care is a critical component of the patient journey. Shared decision making for complex decisions such as this could be enhanced by a decision aid, a practice which is well utilised in other disciplines but limited for nephrology. A multidisciplinary team in Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) utilised current decision-making theory and best practice to develop the 'My Kidneys, My Choice', a decision aid for the treatment of kidney disease. A patient-centred, five-sectioned tool is now complete and freely available to all ANZ units to support the ESKD education and shared decision-making process. Distribution and education have occurred across ANZ and evaluation of the decision aid in practice is in the first phase. Development of a new tool such as an ESKD decision aid requires vision, multidisciplinary input and ongoing implementation resources. This tool is being integrated into ANZ, ESKD education practice and is promoting the philosophy of shared decision making. © 2014 European Dialysis and Transplant Nurses Association/European Renal Care Association.

Child-parent shared decision making about asthma management.

Science.gov (United States)

Garnett, Victoria; Smith, Joanna; Ormandy, Paula

2016-05-09

Aim To explore and describe child-parent shared decision making for the management of childhood asthma. Methods A qualitative, descriptive, interview-based study was undertaken. Eight children and nine parents participated. The framework approach underpinned data analysis. Findings A dynamic model of the way children and parents transfer, shift and share asthma management decisions was uncovered. Asthma management decisions between children and parents were non-linear, with responsibility transferring from parent to child under different conditions. Children made a range of decisions about their asthma, often sharing decisions with their parents. However, during acute illness episodes, children often relied on parents to make decisions about their asthma. Conclusion Neither the child nor parent has complete autonomy over asthma management decisions. Decision making is a dynamic, shifting and shared process, dependent on contextual factors and child and parent decision preferences.

Barriers and facilitators to the dissemination of DECISION+, a continuing medical education program for optimizing decisions about antibiotics for acute respiratory infections in primary care: A study protocol

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Gagnon Marie-Pierre

2011-01-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background In North America, acute respiratory infections are the main reason for doctors' visits in primary care. Family physicians and their patients overuse antibiotics for treating acute respiratory infections. In a pilot clustered randomized trial, we showed that DECISION+, a continuing medical education program in shared decision making, has the potential to reduce the overuse of antibiotics for treating acute respiratory infections. DECISION+ learning activities consisted of three interactive sessions of three hours each, reminders at the point of care, and feedback to doctors on their agreement with patients about comfort with the decision whether to use antibiotics. The objective of this study is to identify the barriers and facilitators to physicians' participation in DECISION+ with the goal of disseminating DECISION+ on a larger scale. Methods/design This descriptive study will use mixed methods and retrospective and prospective components. All analyses will be based on an adapted version of the Ottawa Model of Research Use. First, we will use qualitative methods to analyze the following retrospective data from the pilot study: the logbooks of eight research assistants, the transcriptions of 15 training sessions, and 27 participant evaluations of the DECISION+ training sessions. Second, we will collect prospective data in semi-structured focus groups composed of family physicians to identify barriers and facilitators to the dissemination of a future training program similar to DECISION+. All 39 family physicians exposed to DECISION+ during the pilot project will be eligible to participate. We will use a self-administered questionnaire based on Azjen's Theory of Planned Behaviour to assess participants' intention to take part in future training programs similar to DECISION+. Discussion Barriers and facilitators identified in this project will guide modifications to DECISION+, a continuing medical education program in shared

Effect of shared decision-making on therapeutic alliance in addiction health care

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

EAG Joosten

2008-10-01

Full Text Available EAG Joosten1,2, GH de Weert3, T Sensky4, CPF van der Staak5, CAJ de Jong1,21Novadic-Kentron, Network for Addiction Treatment Services, Vught, the Netherlands; 2Nijmegen Institute for Scientist-Practitioners in Addiction (NISPA, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; 3Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Health Care, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; 4Department of Psychological Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; 5Academic Centre for Social Sciences, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the NetherlandsBackground: In recent decades, shared decision-making (SDM models have been developed to increase patient involvement in treatment decisions. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of a shared decision-making intervention (SDMI for substance-dependent patients on patients’ and clinicians’ perceptions of therapeutic alliance.Methods: Clinicians were randomly assigned to SDMI or usual procedures to reach a treatment agreement. SDMI is a structured, manualized, 5-session procedure to facilitate treatment agreement and consists of five standardized sessions.Results: Patients’ perceptions of the therapeutic alliance were very favorable at start of treatment, and no differences were found between intervention groups. Clinicians’ scores on perceived helpfulness and on the overall therapeutic alliance were higher in the SDMI group than in the controls, after 8 weeks of treatment and at the end of treatment.Conclusion: The present study has shown that a specific intervention to enhance shared decision-making results in favorable changes in clinicians’ perceptions of the therapeutic alliance.Keywords: therapeutic alliance, helping alliance, shared decision-making, addiction, substance-dependence

Shared decision-making.

Science.gov (United States)

Godolphin, William

2009-01-01

Shared decision-making has been called the crux of patient-centred care and identified as a key part of change for improved quality and safety in healthcare. However, it rarely happens, is hard to do and is not taught - for many reasons. Talking with patients about options is not embedded in the attitudes or communication skills training of most healthcare professionals. Information tools such as patient decision aids, personal health records and the Internet will help to shift this state, as will policy that drives patient and public involvement in healthcare delivery and training.

Patients' perceptions of sharing in decisions: a systematic review of interventions to enhance shared decision making in routine clinical practice.

Science.gov (United States)

Légaré, France; Turcotte, Stéphane; Stacey, Dawn; Ratté, Stéphane; Kryworuchko, Jennifer; Graham, Ian D

2012-01-01

Shared decision making is the process in which a healthcare choice is made jointly by the health professional and the patient. Little is known about what patients view as effective or ineffective strategies to implement shared decision making in routine clinical practice. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of interventions to improve health professionals' adoption of shared decision making in routine clinical practice, as seen by patients. We searched electronic databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) from their inception to mid-March 2009. We found additional material by reviewing the reference lists of the studies found in the databases; systematic reviews of studies on shared decision making; the proceedings of various editions of the International Shared Decision Making Conference; and the transcripts of the Society for Medical Decision Making's meetings. In our study selection, we included randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, controlled before-and-after studies, and interrupted time series analyses in which patients evaluated interventions to improve health professionals' adoption of shared decision making. The interventions in question consisted of the distribution of printed educational material; educational meetings; audit and feedback; reminders; and patient-mediated initiatives (e.g. patient decision aids). Two reviewers independently screened the studies and extracted data. Statistical analyses considered categorical and continuous process measures. We computed the standardized effect size for each outcome at the 95% confidence interval. The primary outcome of interest was health professionals' adoption of shared decision making as reported by patients in a self-administered questionnaire. Of the 6764 search results, 21 studies reported 35 relevant comparisons. Overall, the quality of the studies ranged from 0% to 83%. Only three of the 21 studies reported a clinically significant effect

Shared decision making, paternalism and patient choice.

Science.gov (United States)

Sandman, Lars; Munthe, Christian

2010-03-01

In patient centred care, shared decision making is a central feature and widely referred to as a norm for patient centred medical consultation. However, it is far from clear how to distinguish SDM from standard models and ideals for medical decision making, such as paternalism and patient choice, and e.g., whether paternalism and patient choice can involve a greater degree of the sort of sharing involved in SDM and still retain their essential features. In the article, different versions of SDM are explored, versions compatible with paternalism and patient choice as well as versions that go beyond these traditional decision making models. Whenever SDM is discussed or introduced it is of importance to be clear over which of these different versions are being pursued, since they connect to basic values and ideals of health care in different ways. It is further argued that we have reason to pursue versions of SDM involving, what is called, a high level dynamics in medical decision-making. This leaves four alternative models to choose between depending on how we balance between the values of patient best interest, patient autonomy, and an effective decision in terms of patient compliance or adherence: Shared Rational Deliberative Patient Choice, Shared Rational Deliberative Paternalism, Shared Rational Deliberative Joint Decision, and Professionally Driven Best Interest Compromise. In relation to these models it is argued that we ideally should use the Shared Rational Deliberative Joint Decision model. However, when the patient and professional fail to reach consensus we will have reason to pursue the Professionally Driven Best Interest Compromise model since this will best harmonise between the different values at stake: patient best interest, patient autonomy, patient adherence and a continued care relationship.

Shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions.

Science.gov (United States)

Duncan, Edward; Best, Catherine; Hagen, Suzanne

2010-01-20

synthesis. We included two separate German studies involving a total of 518 participants. One study was undertaken in the inpatient treatment of schizophrenia and the other in the treatment of people newly diagnosed with depression in primary care. Regarding the primary outcomes, one study reported statistically significant increases in patient satisfaction, the other study did not. There was no evidence of effect on clinical outcomes or hospital readmission rates in either study. Regarding secondary outcomes, there was an indication that interventions to increase shared decision making increased doctor facilitation of patient involvement in decision making, and did not increase consultation times. Nor did the interventions increase patient compliance with treatment plans. Neither study reported any harms of the intervention. Definite conclusions cannot be drawn, however, on the basis of these two studies. No firm conclusions can be drawn at present about the effects of shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions. There is no evidence of harm, but there is an urgent need for further research in this area.

Evidence summaries (decision boxes) to prepare clinicians for shared decision-making with patients: a mixed methods implementation study.

Science.gov (United States)

Giguere, Anik M C; Labrecque, Michel; Haynes, R Brian; Grad, Roland; Pluye, Pierre; Légaré, France; Cauchon, Michel; Greenway, Matthew; Carmichael, Pierre-Hugues

2014-10-05

Decision boxes (Dboxes) provide clinicians with research evidence about management options for medical questions that have no single best answer. Dboxes fulfil a need for rapid clinical training tools to prepare clinicians for clinician-patient communication and shared decision-making. We studied the barriers and facilitators to using the Dbox information in clinical practice. We used a mixed methods study with sequential explanatory design. We recruited family physicians, residents, and nurses from six primary health-care clinics. Participants received eight Dboxes covering various questions by email (one per week). For each Dbox, they completed a web questionnaire to rate clinical relevance and cognitive impact and to assess the determinants of their intention to use what they learned from the Dbox to explain to their patients the advantages and disadvantages of the options, based on the theory of planned behaviour (TPB). Following the 8-week delivery period, we conducted focus groups with clinicians and interviews with clinic administrators to explore contextual factors influencing the use of the Dbox information. One hundred clinicians completed the web surveys. In 54% of the 496 questionnaires completed, they reported that their practice would be improved after having read the Dboxes, and in 40%, they stated that they would use this information for their patients. Of those who would use the information for their patients, 89% expected it would benefit their patients, especially in that it would allow the patient to make a decision more in keeping with his/her personal circumstances, values, and preferences. They intended to use the Dboxes in practice (mean 5.6±1.2, scale 1-7, with 7 being "high"), and their intention was significantly related to social norm, perceived behavioural control, and attitude according to the TPB (Pdecision aids and training in shared decision-making would facilitate the use of the Dbox information. Some participants would have liked

A Liberation Health Approach to Examining Challenges and Facilitators of Peer-to-Peer Human Milk Sharing.

Science.gov (United States)

McCloskey, Rebecca J; Karandikar, Sharvari

2018-04-01

Human milk sharing between peers is a common and growing practice. Although human milk has been unequivocally established as the ideal food source for infants, much stigma surrounds the practice of human milk sharing. Furthermore, there is little research examining peer-to-peer human milk sharing. Research Aim: We used the liberation health social work model to examine the experiences of mothers who have received donated human milk from a peer. Research questions were as follows: (a) What challenges do recipient mothers experience in peer-to-peer human milk sharing? (b) What supports do recipient mothers identify in peer-to-peer human milk sharing? Researchers conducted in-depth interviews with mothers ( N = 20) in the United States and Canada who were recipients of peer-to-peer human milk sharing. Researchers independently reviewed transcripts and completed open, axial, and selective coding. The authors discussed conflicts in theme identification until agreement was reached. Challenges to peer-to-peer human milk sharing were (a) substantial effort required to secure human milk; (b) institutional barriers; (c) milk bank specific barriers; and (d) lack of societal awareness and acceptance of human milk sharing. Facilitators included (a) informed decision making and transparency and (b) support from healthcare professionals. Despite risks and barriers, participants continued to pursue peer-to-peer human milk sharing. Informed by a liberation health framework, healthcare professionals-rather than universally discouraging human milk sharing between peers-should facilitate open dialogue with parents about the pros and cons of this practice and about screening recommendations to promote safety and mitigate risk.

Authoritarian physicians and patients' fear of being labeled 'difficult' among key obstacles to shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Frosch, Dominick L; May, Suepattra G; Rendle, Katharine A S; Tietbohl, Caroline; Elwyn, Glyn

2012-05-01

Relatively little is known about why some patients are reluctant to engage in a collaborative discussion with physicians about their choices in health care. To explore this issue further, we conducted six focus-group sessions with forty-eight people in the San Francisco Bay Area. In the focus groups, we found that participants voiced a strong desire to engage in shared decision making about treatment options with their physicians. However, several obstacles inhibit those discussions. These include the fact that even relatively affluent and well-educated patients feel compelled to conform to socially sanctioned roles and defer to physicians during clinical consultations; that physicians can be authoritarian; and that the fear of being categorized as "difficult" prevents patients from participating more fully in their own health care. We argue that physicians may not be aware of a need to create a safe environment for open communication to facilitate shared decision making. Rigorous measures of patient engagement, and of the degree to which health care decisions truly reflect patient preferences, are needed to advance shared decision making in clinical practice.

[Shared medical decision making in gynaecology].

Science.gov (United States)

This, P; Panel, P

2010-02-01

When two options or more can be chosen in medical care, the final decision implies two steps: facts analysis, and patient evaluation of preferences. Shared Medical Decision-Making is a rational conceptual frame that can be used in such cases. In this paper, we describe the concept, its practical modalities, and the questions raised by its use. In gynaecology, many medical situations involve "sensitive preferences choice": for example, contraceptive choice, menorrhagia treatment, and approach of menopause. Some tools from the "Shared Medical Decision Making" concept are useful to structure medical consultations, to convey information, and to reveal patients preferences. Decision aid are used in clinical research settings, but some of them may also be easily used in usual practice, and help physicians to improve both quality and traceability of the decisional process. Copyright 2009 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Cultural influences on the physician-patient encounter: The case of shared treatment decision-making.

Science.gov (United States)

Charles, Cathy; Gafni, Amiram; Whelan, Tim; O'Brien, Mary Ann

2006-11-01

In this paper we discuss the influence of culture on the process of treatment decision-making, and in particular, shared treatment decision-making in the physician-patient encounter. We explore two key issues: (1) the meaning of culture and the ways that it can affect treatment decision-making; (2) cultural issues and assumptions underlying the development and use of treatment decision aids. This is a conceptual paper. Based on our knowledge and reading of the key literature in the treatment decision-making field, we looked for written examples where cultural influences were taken into account when discussing the physician-patient encounter and when designing instruments (decision aids) to help patients participate in making decisions. Our assessment of the situation is that to date, and with some recent exceptions, research in the above areas has not been culturally sensitive. We suggest that more research attention should be focused on exploring potential cultural variations in the meaning of and preferences for shared decision-making as well as on the applicability across cultural groups of decision aids developed to facilitate patient participation in treatment decision-making with physicians. Both patients and physicians need to be aware of the cultural assumptions underlying the development and use of decision aids and assess their cultural sensitivity to the needs and preferences of patients in diverse cultural groups.

Implementing shared decision-making: consider all the consequences.

Science.gov (United States)

Elwyn, Glyn; Frosch, Dominick L; Kobrin, Sarah

2016-08-08

The ethical argument that shared decision-making is "the right" thing to do, however laudable, is unlikely to change how healthcare is organized, just as evidence alone will be an insufficient factor: practice change is governed by factors such as cost, profit margin, quality, and efficiency. It is helpful, therefore, when evaluating new approaches such as shared decision-making to conceptualize potential consequences in a way that is broad, long-term, and as relevant as possible to multiple stakeholders. Yet, so far, evaluation metrics for shared decision-making have been mostly focused on short-term outcomes, such as cognitive or affective consequences in patients. The goal of this article is to hypothesize a wider set of consequences, that apply over an extended time horizon, and include outcomes at interactional, team, organizational and system levels, and to call for future research to study these possible consequences. To date, many more studies have evaluated patient decision aids rather than other approaches to shared decision-making, and the outcomes measured have typically been focused on short-term cognitive and affective outcomes, for example knowledge and decisional conflict. From a clinicians perspective, the shared decision-making process could be viewed as either intrinsically rewarding and protective, or burdensome and impractical, yet studies have not focused on the impact on professionals, either positive or negative. At interactional levels, group, team, and microsystem, the potential long-term consequences could include the development of a culture where deliberation and collaboration are regarded as guiding principles, where patients are coached to assess the value of interventions, to trade-off benefits versus harms, and assess their burdens-in short, to new social norms in the clinical workplace. At organizational levels, consistent shared decision-making might boost patient experience evaluations and lead to fewer complaints and legal

[Cancer screening in clinical practice: the value of shared decision-making].

Science.gov (United States)

Cornuz, Jacques; Junod, Noëlle; Pasche, Olivier; Guessous, Idris

2010-07-14

Shared decision-making approach to uncertain clinical situations such as cancer screening seems more appropriate than ever. Shared decision making can be defined as an interactive process where physician and patient share all the stages of the decision making process. For patients who wish to be implicated in the management of their health conditions, physicians might express difficulty to do so. Use of patient decision aids appears to improve such process of shared decision making.

Cancer Counseling of Low-Income Limited English Proficient Latina Women Using Medical Interpreters: Implications for Shared Decision-Making.

Science.gov (United States)

Kamara, Daniella; Weil, Jon; Youngblom, Janey; Guerra, Claudia; Joseph, Galen

2018-02-01

In cancer genetic counseling (CGC), communication across language and culture challenges the model of practice based on shared decision-making. To date, little research has examined the decision-making process of low-income, limited English proficiency (LEP) patients in CGC. This study identified communication patterns in CGC sessions with this population and assessed how these patterns facilitate or inhibit the decision-making process during the sessions. We analyzed 24 audio recordings of CGC sessions conducted in Spanish via telephone interpreters at two public hospitals. Patients were referred for risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer; all were offered genetic testing. Audio files were coded by two bilingual English-Spanish researchers and analyzed using conventional content analysis through an iterative process. The 24 sessions included 13 patients, 6 counselors, and 18 interpreters. Qualitative data analyses identified three key domains - Challenges Posed by Hypothetical Explanations, Misinterpretation by the Medical Interpreter, and Communication Facilitators - that reflect communication patterns and their impact on the counselor's ability to facilitate shared decision-making. Overall, we found an absence of patient participation in the decision-making process. Our data suggest that when counseling LEP Latina patients via medical interpreter, prioritizing information with direct utility for the patient and organizing information into short- and long-term goals may reduce information overload and improve comprehension for patient and interpreter. Further research is needed to test the proposed counseling strategies with this population and to assess how applicable our findings are to other populations.

[Shared decision-making in medical practice--patient-centred communication skills].

Science.gov (United States)

van Staveren, Remke

2011-01-01

Most patients (70%) want to participate actively in important healthcare decisions, the rest (30%) prefer the doctor to make the decision for them. Shared decision-making provides more patient satisfaction, a better quality of life and contributes to a better doctor-patient relationship. Patients making their own decision generally make a well considered and medically sensible choice. In shared decision-making the doctor asks many open questions, gives and requests much information, asks if the patient wishes to participate in the decision-making and explicitly takes into account patient circumstances and preferences. Shared decision-making should remain an individual choice and should not become a new dogma.

Whole mind and shared mind in clinical decision-making.

Science.gov (United States)

Epstein, Ronald Mark

2013-02-01

To review the theory, research evidence and ethical implications regarding "whole mind" and "shared mind" in clinical practice in the context of chronic and serious illnesses. Selective critical review of the intersection of classical and naturalistic decision-making theories, cognitive neuroscience, communication research and ethics as they apply to decision-making and autonomy. Decision-making involves analytic thinking as well as affect and intuition ("whole mind") and sharing cognitive and affective schemas of two or more individuals ("shared mind"). Social relationships can help processing of complex information that otherwise would overwhelm individuals' cognitive capacities. Medical decision-making research, teaching and practice should consider both analytic and non-analytic cognitive processes. Further, research should consider that decisions emerge not only from the individual perspectives of patients, their families and clinicians, but also the perspectives that emerge from the interactions among them. Social interactions have the potential to enhance individual autonomy, as well as to promote relational autonomy based on shared frames of reference. Shared mind has the potential to result in wiser decisions, greater autonomy and self-determination; yet, clinicians and patients should be vigilant for the potential of hierarchical relationships to foster coercion or silencing of the patient's voice. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Development of a Draft Core Set of Domains for Measuring Shared Decision Making in Osteoarthritis: An OMERACT Working Group on Shared Decision Making

Science.gov (United States)

Toupin April, Karine; Barton, Jennifer; Fraenkel, Liana; Li, Linda; Grandpierre, Viviane; Guillemin, Francis; Rader, Tamara; Stacey, Dawn; Légaré, France; Jull, Janet; Petkovic, Jennifer; Scholte Voshaar, Marieke; Welch, Vivian; Lyddiatt, Anne; Hofstetter, Cathie; De Wit, Maarten; March, Lyn; Meade, Tanya; Christensen, Robin; Gaujoux-Viala, Cécile; Suarez-Almazor, Maria E.; Boonen, Annelies; Pohl, Christoph; Martin, Richard; Tugwell, Peter

2015-01-01

Objective Despite the importance of shared decision making for delivering patient-centred care in rheumatology, there is no consensus on how to measure its process and outcomes. The aim of this OMERACT working group is to determine the core set of domains for measuring shared decision making in intervention studies in adults with osteoarthritis (OA), from the perspective of patients, health professionals and researchers. Methods We followed the OMERACT Filter 2.0 to develop a draft core domain set, which consisted of: (i) forming an OMERACT working group; (ii) conducting a review of domains of shared decision making; and (iii) obtaining the opinions of stakeholders using a modified nominal group process held at a session activity at the OMERACT 2014 meeting. Results 26 stakeholders from Europe, North America and Australia, including 5 patient research partners, participated in the session activity. Participants identified the following domains for measuring shared decision making to be included as part of the Draft Core Set: 1) Identifying the decision; 2) Exchanging Information; 3) Clarifying views; 4) Deliberating; 5) Making the decision; 6) Putting the decision into practice; and 7) Assessing the impact of the decision. Contextual factors were also suggested. Conclusion We propose a Draft Core Set of shared decision making domains for OA intervention research studies. Next steps include a workshop at OMERACT 2016 to reach consensus on these proposed domains in the wider OMERACT group, as well as detail sub-domains and assess instruments to develop a Core Outcome Measurement Set. PMID:25877502

Development of a Draft Core Set of Domains for Measuring Shared Decision Making in Osteoarthritis: An OMERACT Working Group on Shared Decision Making.

Science.gov (United States)

Toupin-April, Karine; Barton, Jennifer; Fraenkel, Liana; Li, Linda; Grandpierre, Viviane; Guillemin, Francis; Rader, Tamara; Stacey, Dawn; Légaré, France; Jull, Janet; Petkovic, Jennifer; Scholte-Voshaar, Marieke; Welch, Vivian; Lyddiatt, Anne; Hofstetter, Cathie; De Wit, Maarten; March, Lyn; Meade, Tanya; Christensen, Robin; Gaujoux-Viala, Cécile; Suarez-Almazor, Maria E; Boonen, Annelies; Pohl, Christoph; Martin, Richard; Tugwell, Peter S

2015-12-01

Despite the importance of shared decision making for delivering patient-centered care in rheumatology, there is no consensus on how to measure its process and outcomes. The aim of this Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) working group is to determine the core set of domains for measuring shared decision making in intervention studies in adults with osteoarthritis (OA), from the perspectives of patients, health professionals, and researchers. We followed the OMERACT Filter 2.0 method to develop a draft core domain set by (1) forming an OMERACT working group; (2) conducting a review of domains of shared decision making; and (3) obtaining opinions of all those involved using a modified nominal group process held at a session activity at the OMERACT 12 meeting. In all, 26 people from Europe, North America, and Australia, including 5 patient research partners, participated in the session activity. Participants identified the following domains for measuring shared decision making to be included as part of the draft core set: (1) identifying the decision, (2) exchanging information, (3) clarifying views, (4) deliberating, (5) making the decision, (6) putting the decision into practice, and (7) assessing the effect of the decision. Contextual factors were also suggested. We proposed a draft core set of shared decision-making domains for OA intervention research studies. Next steps include a workshop at OMERACT 13 to reach consensus on these proposed domains in the wider OMERACT group, as well as to detail subdomains and assess instruments to develop a core outcome measurement set.

Exploring dietitians' salient beliefs about shared decision-making behaviors

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Gagnon Marie-Pierre

2011-06-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background Shared decision making (SDM, a process by which health professionals and patients go through the decision-making process together to agree on treatment, is a promising strategy for promoting diet-related decisions that are informed and value based and to which patients adhere well. The objective of the present study was to identify dietitians' salient beliefs regarding their exercise of two behaviors during the clinical encounter, both of which have been deemed essential for SDM to take place: (1 presenting patients with all dietary treatment options for a given health condition and (2 helping patients clarify their values and preferences regarding the options. Methods Twenty-one dietitians were allocated to four focus groups. Facilitators conducted the focus groups using a semistructured interview guide based on the Theory of Planned Behavior. Discussions were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, coded, and analyzed with NVivo8 (QSR International, Cambridge, MA software. Results Most participants stated that better patient adherence to treatment was an advantage of adopting the two SDM behaviors. Dietitians identified patients, physicians, and the multidisciplinary team as normative referents who would approve or disapprove of their adoption of the SDM behaviors. The most often reported barriers and facilitators for the behaviors concerned patients' characteristics, patients' clinical situation, and time. Conclusions The implementation of SDM in nutrition clinical practice can be guided by addressing dietitians' salient beliefs. Identifying these beliefs also provides the theoretical framework needed for developing a quantitative survey questionnaire to further study the determinants of dietitians' adoption of SDM behaviors.

Facilitating Group Decision-Making: Facilitator's Subjective Theories on Group Coordination

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Michaela Kolbe

2008-10-01

Full Text Available A key feature of group facilitation is motivating and coordinating people to perform their joint work. This paper focuses on group coordination which is a prerequisite to group effectiveness, especially in complex tasks. Decision-making in groups is a complex task that consequently needs to be coordinated by explicit rather than implicit coordination mechanisms. Based on the embedded definition that explicit coordination does not just happen but is purposely executed by individuals, we argue that individual coordination intentions and mechanisms should be taken into account. Thus far, the subjective perspective of coordination has been neglected in coordination theory, which is understandable given the difficulties in defining and measuring subjective aspects of group facilitation. We therefore conducted focused interviews with eight experts who either worked as senior managers or as experienced group facilitators and analysed their approaches to group coordination using methods of content analysis. Results show that these experts possess sophisticated mental representations of their coordination behaviour. These subjective coordination theories can be organised in terms of coordination schemes in which coordination-releasing situations are facilitated by special coordination mechanisms that, in turn, lead to the perception of specific consequences. We discuss the importance of these subjective coordination theories for effectively facilitating group decision-making and minimising process losses. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0901287

Health Care Professional Factors Influencing Shared Medical Decision Making in Korea

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Kae-Hwa Jo

2015-11-01

Full Text Available Till date, the medical decision-making process in Korea has followed the paternalist model, relying on the instructions of physicians. However, in recent years, shared decision making at the end-of-life between physicians and nurses is now emphasized in Korea. The purpose of this study was conducted to explore how health care professionals’ characteristics, attitude toward dignified dying, and moral sensitivity affect their shared medical decision making. The design was descriptive survey. This study was undertaken in two university hospitals in two metropolitan cities, South Korea. The participants were 344 nurses and 80 physicians who work at university hospitals selected by convenience sampling method. Data were collected from January 10 through March 20, 2014 using the Dignified Dying Scale, Moral Sensitivity Scale, and Shared Medical Decision-Making Scale. Shared medical decision making, attitude toward dignified dying, moral sensitivity, age, and working experience had a significant correlation with each other. The factors affecting shared medical decision making of Korean health care professionals were moral sensitivity and attitude toward dignified dying. These variables explained 22.4% of the shared medical decision making. Moral sensitivity and a positive attitude toward dignified dying should be promoted among health care professionals as a part of an educational program for shared medical decision making.

Psychiatric service staff perceptions of implementing a shared decision-making tool: a process evaluation study.

Science.gov (United States)

Schön, Ulla-Karin; Grim, Katarina; Wallin, Lars; Rosenberg, David; Svedberg, Petra

2018-12-01

Shared decision making, SDM, in psychiatric services, supports users to experience a greater sense of involvement in treatment, self-efficacy, autonomy and reduced coercion. Decision tools adapted to the needs of users have the potential to support SDM and restructure how users and staff work together to arrive at shared decisions. The aim of this study was to describe and analyse the implementation process of an SDM intervention for users of psychiatric services in Sweden. The implementation was studied through a process evaluation utilizing both quantitative and qualitative methods. In designing the process evaluation for the intervention, three evaluation components were emphasized: contextual factors, implementation issues and mechanisms of impact. The study addresses critical implementation issues related to decision-making authority, the perceived decision-making ability of users and the readiness of the service to increase influence and participation. It also emphasizes the importance of facilitation, as well as suggesting contextual adaptations that may be relevant for the local organizations. The results indicate that staff perceived the decision support tool as user-friendly and useful in supporting participation in decision-making, and suggest that such concrete supports to participation can be a factor in implementation if adequate attention is paid to organizational contexts and structures.

Measurement of shared decision making - a review of instruments

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Scholl, I.; Koelewijn-van Loon, M.; Sepucha, K.; Elwyn, G.; Legare, F.; Harter, M.; Dirmaier, J.

2011-01-01

The last years have seen a clear move towards shared decision making (SDM) and increased patient involvement in many countries. However, as the field of SDM research is still relatively young, new instruments for the measurement of (shared) decision making (process, outcome and surrounding elements)

Shared decision making in the management of children with newly diagnosed immune thrombocytopenia.

Science.gov (United States)

Beck, Carolyn E; Boydell, Katherine M; Stasiulis, Elaine; Blanchette, Victor S; Llewellyn-Thomas, Hilary; Birken, Catherine S; Breakey, Vicky R; Parkin, Patricia C

2014-10-01

This study aimed to examine the treatment decision-making process for children hospitalized with newly diagnosed immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). Using focus groups, we studied children with ITP, parents of children with ITP, and health care professionals, inquiring about participants' experience with decision support and decision making in newly diagnosed ITP. Data were examined using thematic analysis. Themes that emerged from children were feelings of "anxiety, fear, and confusion"; the need to "understand information"; and "treatment choice," the experience of which was age dependent. For parents, "anxiety, fear, and confusion" was a dominant theme; "treatment choice" revealed that participants felt directed toward intravenous immune globulin (IVIG) for initial treatment. For health care professionals, "comfort level" highlighted factors contributing to professionals' comfort with offering options; "assumptions" were made about parental desire for participation in shared decision making (SDM) and parental acceptance of treatment options; "providing information" was informative regarding modes of facilitating SDM; and "treatment choice" revealed a discrepancy between current practice (directed toward IVIG) and the ideal of SDM. At our center, families of children with newly diagnosed ITP are not experiencing SDM. Our findings support the implementation of SDM to facilitate patient-centered care for the management of pediatric ITP.

Decision boxes for clinicians to support evidence-based practice and shared decision making: the user experience

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Giguere Anik

2012-08-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background This project engages patients and physicians in the development of Decision Boxes, short clinical topic summaries covering medical questions that have no single best answer. Decision Boxes aim to prepare the clinician to communicate the risks and benefits of the available options to the patient so they can make an informed decision together. Methods Seven researchers (including four practicing family physicians selected 10 clinical topics relevant to primary care practice through a Delphi survey. We then developed two one-page prototypes on two of these topics: prostate cancer screening with the prostate-specific antigen test, and prenatal screening for trisomy 21 with the serum integrated test. We presented the prototypes to purposeful samples of family physicians distributed in two focus groups, and patients distributed in four focus groups. We used the User Experience Honeycomb to explore barriers and facilitators to the communication design used in Decision Boxes. All discussions were transcribed, and three researchers proceeded to thematic content analysis of the transcriptions. The coding scheme was first developed from the Honeycomb’s seven themes (valuable, usable, credible, useful, desirable, accessible, and findable, and included new themes suggested by the data. Prototypes were modified in light of our findings. Results Three rounds were necessary for a majority of researchers to select 10 clinical topics. Fifteen physicians and 33 patients participated in the focus groups. Following analyses, three sections were added to the Decision Boxes: introduction, patient counseling, and references. The information was spread to two pages to try to make the Decision Boxes less busy and improve users’ first impression. To try to improve credibility, we gave more visibility to the research institutions involved in development. A statement on the boxes’ purpose and a flow chart representing the shared decision

Institutional constraints on strategic maneuvering in shared decision medical decision making

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Snoeck Henkemans, A.F.; Mohammed, D.

2012-01-01

In this paper it is first investigated to what extent the institutional goal and basic principles of shared decision making are compatible with the aim and rules for critical discussion. Next, some techniques that doctors may use to present their own treatment preferences strategically in a shared

A qualitative systematic review of internal and external influences on shared decision-making in all health care settings.

Science.gov (United States)

Truglio-Londrigan, Marie; Slyer, Jason T; Singleton, Joanne K; Worral, Priscilla

. The competencies outlined in this model include:The healthcare provider must demonstrate knowledge, competencies, and skills as a communicator. The skills for communication competency require the healthcare provider to be able to elicit the patient's thoughts and input regarding treatment management throughout the consultation. The healthcare provider must also demonstrate competencies in assessment skills beyond physical assessment that includes the ability to assess the patient's perceptions and readiness to participate. In addition, the healthcare provider must be able to assess the patient's readiness to learn the information that the patient needs to know in order to fully engage in the shared decision-making process, assess what the patient already knows, what the patient does not know, and whether or not the information that the patient knows is accurate. Once this assessment is completed the healthcare provider then must draw on his/her knowledge, competencies, and skills necessary to teach the patient what the patient needs to know to be informed. This facilitates the notion of the tailor-made information noted previously. The healthcare provider also requires competencies in how to check and evaluate the entire process to ensure that the patient does understand and accept with comfort not only the plan being negotiated but the entire process of sharing in decision-making. In addition to the above, there are further competencies such as competence in working with groups and teams, competencies in terms of cultural knowledge, competencies with regard to negotiation skills, as well as, competencies when faced with ethical challenges.Shared decision-making has been associated with autonomy, empowerment, and effectiveness and efficiency. Both patients and health care providers have noted improvement in relationships and improved interactions when shared decision-making is in evidence. Along with this improved relationship and interaction enhanced compliance is

To Share or Not to Share: Malaysian Healthcare Professionals' Views on Localized Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Making Roles.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Yew Kong Lee

Full Text Available To explore the views of Malaysian healthcare professionals (HCPs on stakeholders' decision making roles in localized prostate cancer (PCa treatment.Qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted with HCPs treating PCa. Data was analysed using a thematic approach. Four in-depth interviews and three focus group discussions were conducted between December 2012 and March 2013 using a topic guide. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed thematically.The participants comprised private urologists (n = 4, government urologists (n = 6, urology trainees (n = 6, government policy maker (n = 1 and oncologists (n = 3. HCP perceptions of the roles of the three parties involved (HCPs, patients, family included: HCP as the main decision maker, HCP as a guide to patients' decision making, HCP as a facilitator to family involvement, patients as main decision maker and patient prefers HCP to decide. HCPs preferred to share the decision with patients due to equipoise between prostate treatment options. Family culture was important as family members often decided on the patient's treatment due to Malaysia's close-knit family culture.A range of decision making roles were reported by HCPs. It is thus important that stakeholder roles are clarified during PCa treatment decisions. HCPs need to cultivate an awareness of sociocultural norms and family dynamics when supporting non-Western patients in making decisions about PCa.

To Share or Not to Share: Malaysian Healthcare Professionals' Views on Localized Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Making Roles.

Science.gov (United States)

Lee, Yew Kong; Lee, Ping Yein; Cheong, Ai Theng; Ng, Chirk Jenn; Abdullah, Khatijah Lim; Ong, Teng Aik; Razack, Azad Hassan Abdul

2015-01-01

To explore the views of Malaysian healthcare professionals (HCPs) on stakeholders' decision making roles in localized prostate cancer (PCa) treatment. Qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted with HCPs treating PCa. Data was analysed using a thematic approach. Four in-depth interviews and three focus group discussions were conducted between December 2012 and March 2013 using a topic guide. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed thematically. The participants comprised private urologists (n = 4), government urologists (n = 6), urology trainees (n = 6), government policy maker (n = 1) and oncologists (n = 3). HCP perceptions of the roles of the three parties involved (HCPs, patients, family) included: HCP as the main decision maker, HCP as a guide to patients' decision making, HCP as a facilitator to family involvement, patients as main decision maker and patient prefers HCP to decide. HCPs preferred to share the decision with patients due to equipoise between prostate treatment options. Family culture was important as family members often decided on the patient's treatment due to Malaysia's close-knit family culture. A range of decision making roles were reported by HCPs. It is thus important that stakeholder roles are clarified during PCa treatment decisions. HCPs need to cultivate an awareness of sociocultural norms and family dynamics when supporting non-Western patients in making decisions about PCa.

Facilitating Knowledge Sharing in Russian and Chinese Subsidiaries

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Hutchings, Kate; Michailova, Snejina

2003-01-01

operations hasbecome an issue of increasing importance. Where the cultural distance between homeand host nations is great, as it is between Western industrialised economies and thetransition economies of the (former) Communist nations, there is even greatersaliency for achieving effective knowledge sharing......The unprecedented escalation in the number of organisations that have decided tointernationalise their operations in the last two decades, and the internationalmovement of labour that has accompanied such expansion, has meant thatunderstanding the process of knowledge sharing within subsidiary...... if its potential value for gainingorganisational competitive advantage is to be harnessed. In examining knowledgesharing in Russia and China, this paper specifically addresses how group membershipand personal networking in these countries facilitate and impede knowledge sharing.Ultimately, the paper...

Decision Support and Shared Decision Making About Active Surveillance Versus Active Treatment Among Men Diagnosed with Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: a Pilot Study.

Science.gov (United States)

Myers, Ronald E; Leader, Amy E; Censits, Jean Hoffman; Trabulsi, Edouard J; Keith, Scott W; Petrich, Anett M; Quinn, Anna M; Den, Robert B; Hurwitz, Mark D; Lallas, Costas D; Hegarty, Sarah E; Dicker, Adam P; Zeigler-Johnson, Charnita M; Giri, Veda N; Ayaz, Hasan; Gomella, Leonard G

2018-02-01

This study aimed to explore the effects of a decision support intervention (DSI) and shared decision making (SDM) on knowledge, perceptions about treatment, and treatment choice among men diagnosed with localized low-risk prostate cancer (PCa). At a multidisciplinary clinic visit, 30 consenting men with localized low-risk PCa completed a baseline survey, had a nurse-mediated online DS session to clarify preference for active surveillance (AS) or active treatment (AT), and met with clinicians for SDM. Participants also completed a follow-up survey at 30 days. We assessed change in treatment knowledge, decisional conflict, and perceptions and identified predictors of AS. At follow-up, participants exhibited increased knowledge (p decision. Perceived support of the decision facilitated patient choice of AS.

Shared decision-making during surgical consultation for gallstones at a safety-net hospital.

Science.gov (United States)

Mueck, Krislynn M; Leal, Isabel M; Wan, Charlie C; Goldberg, Braden F; Saunders, Tamara E; Millas, Stefanos G; Liang, Mike K; Ko, Tien C; Kao, Lillian S

2018-04-01

Understanding patient perspectives regarding shared decision-making is crucial to providing informed, patient-centered care. Little is known about perceptions of vulnerable patients regarding shared decision-making during surgical consultation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a validated tool reflects perceptions of shared decision-making accurately among patients seeking surgical consultation for gallstones at a safety-net hospital. A mixed methods study was conducted in a sample of adult patients with gallstones evaluated at a safety-net surgery clinic between May to July 2016. Semi-structured interviews were conducted after their initial surgical consultation and analyzed for emerging themes. Patients were administered the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire and Autonomy Preference Scale. Univariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with shared decision-making and to compare the results of the surveys to those of the interviews. The majority of patients (N = 30) were female (90%), Hispanic (80%), Spanish-speaking (70%), and middle-aged (45.7 ± 16 years). The proportion of patients who perceived shared decision-making was greater in the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire versus the interviews (83% vs 27%, P decision for operation was not associated with shared decision-making. Contributory factors to this discordance include patient unfamiliarity with shared decision-making, deference to surgeon authority, lack of discussion about different treatments, and confusion between aligned versus shared decisions. Available questionnaires may overestimate shared decision-making in vulnerable patients suggesting the need for alternative or modifications to existing methods. Furthermore, such metrics should be assessed for correlation with patient-reported outcomes, such as satisfaction with decisions and health status. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Online patient information on Vagus Nerve Stimulation: How reliable is it for facilitating shared decision making?

Science.gov (United States)

Ved, Ronak; Cobbold, Naomi; Igbagiri, Kueni; Willis, Mark; Leach, Paul; Zaben, Malik

2017-08-01

This study evaluates the quality of information available on the internet for carers of children with epilepsy considering treatment with Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS). Selected key phrases were entered into two popular search engines (Google™, Yahoo™). These phrases were: "Vagus nerve stimulator", alone and in combination with "childhood epilepsy", "paediatric epilepsy" and "epilepsy in childhood"; "VNS", and "VNS epilepsy". The first 50 hits per search were then screened. Of 600 identified sites, duplicated (262), irrelevant (230) and inaccessible (15) results were excluded. 93 websites were identified for evaluation using the DISCERN instrument, an online validation tool for patient information websites. The mean DISCERN score of all analysed websites was 39/80 (49%; SD 13.5). This equates to Fair to borderline Poor global quality, (Excellent=80-63; Good=62-51; Fair=50-39; Poor=38-27; Very poor=26-15). None of the analysed sites obtained an Excellent quality rating. 13% (12) obtained a Good score, 40% (37) obtained an Average score, 35% (33) obtained a Poor score, and 12% (11) obtained a Very poor score. The cohort of websites scored particularly poorly on assessment of whether reliable, holistic information was presented, for instance provision of reliable sources, (28%, SD 18) and discussion of alternative treatments, (30%, SD 14). To facilitate patient-centred shared decision-making, high quality information needs to be available for patients and families considering VNS. This study identifies that such information is difficult to locate on the internet. There is a need to develop focussed and reliable online patient resources for VNS. Copyright © 2017 British Epilepsy Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Shared Mind: Communication, Decision Making, and Autonomy in Serious Illness

Science.gov (United States)

Epstein, Ronald M.; Street, Richard L.

2011-01-01

In the context of serious illness, individuals usually rely on others to help them think and feel their way through difficult decisions. To help us to understand why, when, and how individuals involve trusted others in sharing information, deliberation, and decision making, we offer the concept of shared mind—ways in which new ideas and perspectives can emerge through the sharing of thoughts, feelings, perceptions, meanings, and intentions among 2 or more people. We consider how shared mind manifests in relationships and organizations in general, building on studies of collaborative cognition, attunement, and sensemaking. Then, we explore how shared mind might be promoted through communication, when appropriate, and the implications of shared mind for decision making and patient autonomy. Next, we consider a continuum of patient-centered approaches to patient-clinician interactions. At one end of the continuum, an interactional approach promotes knowing the patient as a person, tailoring information, constructing preferences, achieving consensus, and promoting relational autonomy. At the other end, a transactional approach focuses on knowledge about the patient, information-as-commodity, negotiation, consent, and individual autonomy. Finally, we propose that autonomy and decision making should consider not only the individual perspectives of patients, their families, and members of the health care team, but also the perspectives that emerge from the interactions among them. By drawing attention to shared mind, clinicians can observe in what ways they can promote it through bidirectional sharing of information and engaging in shared deliberation. PMID:21911765

Shared decision-making in stroke: an evolving approach to improved patient care.

Science.gov (United States)

Armstrong, Melissa J

2017-06-01

Shared decision-making (SDM) occurs when patients, families and clinicians consider patients' values and preferences alongside the best medical evidence and partner to make the best decision for a given patient in a specific scenario. SDM is increasingly promoted within Western contexts and is also being explored outside such settings, including in China. SDM and tools to promote SDM can improve patients' knowledge/understanding, participation in the decision-making process, satisfaction and trust in the healthcare team. SDM has also proposed long-term benefits to patients, clinicians, organisations and healthcare systems. To successfully perform SDM, clinicians must know their patients' values and goals and the evidence underlying different diagnostic and treatment options. This is relevant for decisions throughout stroke care, from thrombolysis to goals of care, diagnostic assessments, rehabilitation strategies, and secondary stroke prevention. Various physician, patient, family, cultural and system barriers to SDM exist. Strategies to overcome these barriers and facilitate SDM include clinician motivation, patient participation, adequate time and tools to support the process, such as decision aids. Although research about SDM in stroke care is lacking, decision aids are available for select decisions, such as anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Future research is needed regarding both cultural aspects of successful SDM and application of SDM to stroke-specific contexts.

Incentivizing shared decision making in the USA--where are we now?

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Durand, M.A.; Barr, P.J.; Walsh, T.; Elwyn, G.

2015-01-01

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Care Act raised significant interest in the process of shared decision making, the role of patient decision aids, and incentivizing their utilization. However, it has not been clear how best to put incentives into practice, and how the implementation of shared decision

Consumer and relationship factors associated with shared decision making in mental health consultations.

Science.gov (United States)

Matthias, Marianne S; Fukui, Sadaaki; Kukla, Marina; Eliacin, Johanne; Bonfils, Kelsey A; Firmin, Ruth L; Oles, Sylwia K; Adams, Erin L; Collins, Linda A; Salyers, Michelle P

2014-12-01

This study explored the association between shared decision making and consumers' illness management skills and consumer-provider relationships. Medication management appointments for 79 consumers were audio recorded. Independent coders rated overall shared decision making, minimum level of shared decision making, and consumer-provider agreement for 63 clients whose visit included a treatment decision. Mental health diagnoses, medication adherence, patient activation, illness management, working alliance, and length of consumer-provider relationships were also assessed. Correlation analyses were used to determine relationships among measures. Overall shared decision making was not associated with any variables. Minimum levels of shared decision making were associated with higher scores on the bond subscale of the Working Alliance Inventory, indicating a higher degree of liking and trust, and with better medication adherence. Agreement was associated with shorter consumer-provider relationships. Consumer-provider relationships and shared decision making might have a more nuanced association than originally thought.

Barriers and Facilitators to Patient-Provider Communication When Discussing Breast Cancer Risk to Aid in the Development of Decision Support Tools.

Science.gov (United States)

Yi, Haeseung; Xiao, Tong; Thomas, Parijatham S; Aguirre, Alejandra N; Smalletz, Cindy; Dimond, Jill; Finkelstein, Joseph; Infante, Katherine; Trivedi, Meghna; David, Raven; Vargas, Jennifer; Crew, Katherine D; Kukafka, Rita

2015-01-01

The purpose of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators to patient-provider communication when discussing breast cancer risk to aid in the development of decision support tools. Four patient focus groups (N=34) and eight provider focus groups (N=10) took place in Northern Manhattan. A qualitative analysis was conducted using Atlas.ti software. The coding yielded 62.3%-94.5% agreement. The results showed that 1) barriers are time constraints, lack of knowledge, low health literacy, and language barriers, and 2) facilitators are information needs, desire for personalization, and autonomy when communicating risk in patient-provider encounters. These results will inform the development of a patient-centered decision aid (RealRisks) and a provider-facing breast cancer risk navigation (BNAV) tool, which are designed to facilitate patient-provider risk communication and shared decision-making about breast cancer prevention strategies, such as chemoprevention.

Shared Decision-making in the Emergency Department: Respecting Patient Autonomy When Seconds Count.

Science.gov (United States)

Hess, Erik P; Grudzen, Corita R; Thomson, Richard; Raja, Ali S; Carpenter, Christopher R

2015-07-01

Shared decision-making (SDM), a collaborative process in which patients and providers make health care decisions together, taking into account the best scientific evidence available, as well as the patient's values and preferences, is being increasingly advocated as the optimal approach to decision-making for many health care decisions. The rapidly paced and often chaotic environment of the emergency department (ED), however, is a unique clinical setting that offers many practical and contextual challenges. Despite these challenges, in a recent survey emergency physicians reported there to be more than one reasonable management option for over 50% of their patients and that they take an SDM approach in 58% of such patients. SDM has also been selected as the topic on which to develop a future research agenda at the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference, "Shared Decision-making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy-relevant Patient-centered Research Agenda" (http://www.saem.org/annual-meeting/education/2016-aem-consensus-conference). In this paper the authors describe the conceptual model of SDM as originally conceived by Charles and Gafni and highlight aspects of the model relevant to the practice of emergency medicine. In addition, through the use of vignettes from the authors' clinical practices, the applicability of SDM to contemporary EM practice is illustrated and the ethical and pragmatic implications of taking an SDM approach are explored. It is hoped that this document will be read in advance of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference, to facilitate group discussions at the conference. © 2015 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

Identifying design considerations for a shared decision aid for use at the point of outpatient clinical care: An ethnographic study at an inner city clinic.

Science.gov (United States)

Hajizadeh, Negin; Perez Figueroa, Rafael E; Uhler, Lauren M; Chiou, Erin; Perchonok, Jennifer E; Montague, Enid

2013-03-06

Computerized decision aids could facilitate shared decision-making at the point of outpatient clinical care. The objective of this study was to investigate whether a computerized shared decision aid would be feasible to implement in an inner-city clinic by evaluating the current practices in shared decision-making, clinicians' use of computers, patient and clinicians' attitudes and beliefs toward computerized decision aids, and the influence of time on shared decision-making. Qualitative data analysis of observations and semi-structured interviews with patients and clinicians at an inner-city outpatient clinic. The findings provided an exploratory look at the prevalence of shared decision-making and attitudes about health information technology and decision aids. A prominent barrier to clinicians engaging in shared decision-making was a lack of perceived patient understanding of medical information. Some patients preferred their clinicians make recommendations for them rather than engage in formal shared decision-making. Health information technology was an integral part of the clinic visit and welcomed by most clinicians and patients. Some patients expressed the desire to engage with health information technology such as viewing their medical information on the computer screen with their clinicians. All participants were receptive to the idea of a decision aid integrated within the clinic visit although some clinicians were concerned about the accuracy of prognostic estimates for complex medical problems. We identified several important considerations for the design and implementation of a computerized decision aid including opportunities to: bridge clinician-patient communication about medical information while taking into account individual patients' decision-making preferences, complement expert clinician judgment with prognostic estimates, take advantage of patient waiting times, and make tasks involved during the clinic visit more efficient. These findings

Comparativism and the Grounds for Person-Centered Care and Shared Decision Making.

Science.gov (United States)

Herlitz, Anders

2017-01-01

This article provides a new argument and a new value-theoretical ground for person-centered care and shared decision making that ascribes to it the role of enabling rational choice in situations involving clinical choice. Rather than referring to good health outcomes and/or ethical grounds such as patient autonomy, it argues that a plausible justification and ground for person-centered care and shared decision making is preservation of rationality in the face of comparative non-determinacy in clinical settings. Often, no alternative treatment will be better than or equal to every other alternative. In the face of such comparative non-determinacy, Ruth Chang has argued that we can make rational decisions by invoking reasons that are created through acts of willing. This article transfers this view to clinical decision making and argues that shared decision making provides a solution to non-determinacy problems in clinical settings. This view of the role of shared decision making provides a new understanding of its nature, and it also allows us to better understand when caregivers should engage in shared decision making and when they should not. Copyright 2017 The Journal of Clinical Ethics. All rights reserved.

Medical students, clinical preventive services, and shared decision-making.

Science.gov (United States)

Keefe, Carole W; Thompson, Margaret E; Noel, Mary Margaret

2002-11-01

Improving access to preventive care requires addressing patient, provider, and systems barriers. Patients often lack knowledge or are skeptical about the importance of prevention. Physicians feel that they have too little time, are not trained to deliver preventive services, and are concerned about the effectiveness of prevention. We have implemented an educational module in the required family practice clerkship (1) to enhance medical student learning about common clinical preventive services and (2) to teach students how to inform and involve patients in shared decision making about those services. Students are asked to examine available evidence-based information for preventive screening services. They are encouraged to look at the recommendations of various organizations and use such resources as reports from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force to determine recommendations they want to be knowledgeable about in talking with their patients. For learning shared decision making, students are trained to use a model adapted from Braddock and colleagues(1) to discuss specific screening services and to engage patients in the process of making informed decisions about what is best for their own health. The shared decision making is presented and modeled by faculty, discussed in small groups, and students practice using Web-based cases and simulations. The students are evaluated using formative and summative performance-based assessments as they interact with simulated patients about (1) screening for high blood cholesterol and other lipid abnormalities, (2) screening for colorectal cancer, (3) screening for prostate cancer, and (4) screening for breast cancer. The final student evaluation is a ten-minute, videotaped discussion with a simulated patient about screening for colorectal cancer that is graded against a checklist that focuses primarily on the elements of shared decision making. Our medical students appear quite willing to accept shared decision making as

How can continuing professional development better promote shared decision-making? Perspectives from an international collaboration

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Labrecque Michel

2011-07-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background Shared decision-making is not widely implemented in healthcare. We aimed to set a research agenda about promoting shared decision-making through continuing professional development. Methods Thirty-six participants met for two days. Results Participants suggested ways to improve an environmental scan that had inventoried 53 shared decision-making training programs from 14 countries. Their proposed research agenda included reaching an international consensus on shared decision-making competencies and creating a framework for accrediting continuing professional development initiatives in shared decision-making. Conclusions Variability in shared decision-making training programs showcases the need for quality assurance frameworks.

Attitudes towards poverty, organizations, ethics and morals: Israeli social workers' shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Levin, Lia; Schwartz-Tayri, Talia

2017-06-01

Partnerships between service users and social workers are complex in nature and can be driven by both personal and contextual circumstances. This study sought to explore the relationship between social workers' involvement in shared decision making with service users, their attitudes towards service users in poverty, moral standards and health and social care organizations' policies towards shared decision making. Based on the responses of 225 licensed social workers from health and social care agencies in the public, private and third sectors in Israel, path analysis was used to test a hypothesized model. Structural attributions for poverty contributed to attitudes towards people who live in poverty, which led to shared decision making. Also, organizational support in shared decision making, and professional moral identity, contributed to ethical behaviour which led to shared decision making. The results of this analysis revealed that shared decision making may be a scion of branched roots planted in the relationship between ethics, organizations and Stigma. © 2016 The Authors. Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Enhancing shared decision making through assessment of patient-clinician concordance on decision quality

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Kaltoft, Mette Kjer; Selby, Warwick; Salkeld, Glenn

to quantify, document, and suggest how future dyadic decisions can be enhanced by criterion prioritisation. Associations between patient’s MDQ-W before, and MDQ-R after consultation with their clinician were analysed along with patient scores from the Satisfaction With Decision (SWD) instrument. Results...... and clinician using the dually-personalised decomposable MyDecisionQuality (MDQ) instrument. This has the potential to guide future work on optimising dyad-specific patient-clinician communication for shared decision making and informed consent....

Why shared decision making is not good enough: lessons from patients

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Olthuis, G.J.; Leget, C.J.W.; Grypdonck, M.H.F.

2014-01-01

A closer look at the lived illness experiences of medical professionals themselves shows that shared decision making is in need of a logic of care. This paper underlines that medical decision making inevitably takes place in a messy and uncertain context in which sharing responsibilities may impose

Recent Patterns in Shared Decision Making for Prostate-Specific Antigen Testing in the United States.

Science.gov (United States)

Fedewa, Stacey A; Gansler, Ted; Smith, Robert; Sauer, Ann Goding; Wender, Richard; Brawley, Otis W; Jemal, Ahmedin

2018-03-01

Previous studies report infrequent use of shared decision making for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. It is unknown whether this pattern has changed recently considering increased emphasis on shared decision making in prostate cancer screening recommendations. Thus, the objective of this study is to examine recent changes in shared decision making. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study among men aged 50 years and older in the United States using 2010 and 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data (n = 9,598). Changes in receipt of shared decision making were expressed as adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Analyses were stratified on PSA testing (recent [in the past year] or no testing). Elements of shared decision making assessed included the patient being informed about the advantages only, advantages and disadvantages, and full shared decision making (advantages, disadvantages, and uncertainties). Among men with recent PSA testing, 58.5% and 62.6% reported having received ≥1 element of shared decision making in 2010 and 2015, respectively ( P = .054, aPR = 1.04; 95% CI, 0.98-1.11). Between 2010 and 2015, being told only about the advantages of PSA testing significantly declined (aPR = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.96) and full shared decision making prevalence significantly increased (aPR = 1.51; 95% CI, 1.28-1.79) in recently tested men. Among men without prior PSA testing, 10% reported ≥1 element of shared decision making, which did not change with time. Between 2010 and 2015, there was no increase in shared decision making among men with recent PSA testing though there was a shift away from only being told about the advantages of PSA testing towards full shared decision making. Many men receiving PSA testing did not receive shared decision making. © 2018 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc.

Shared decision making and patient choice for growth hormone therapy: current perspectives

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

George B

2016-06-01

Full Text Available Belinda George, Vageesh Ayyar Department of Endocrinology, St. John’s Medical College Hospital, Bangalore, Karnataka, India Abstract: Growth hormone has now been available in medical practice for close to 50 years. Its use has provided dramatic results in patients with growth hormone deficiency and it is associated with an overall favorable safety profile. Over the years, the utility of growth hormone has expanded to include treatment for short stature associated with conditions other than growth hormone deficiency, and this situation warrants greater involvement of the child and parents in the shared decision-making process. Shared decision making is in good conformance to the principle of informed consent, and it also improves the compliance and adherence to therapy as the patient fully understands the benefit and safety of the treatment. In the pediatric-care setting, the decision-making interactions usually occur between the health care provider, patient, and parents. The process may range from an autonomous decision-making pattern, where the patient or parents are fully responsible for the decision taken, to the paternalistic decision-making pattern, where the health care provider assumes full responsibility for the decision taken. However, the ideal situation is one where a truly shared decision-making process happens, in which the doctor and patient/parents work together to choose an evidence-based option, in line with the patient’s preferences and wishes. The limited data available on shared decision making with regard to growth hormone replacement, however, is not very encouraging and suggests that the actual involvement of the parents as perceived by them is less than optimal. Introduction of a simple structured model for a shared decision-making process that can be easily incorporated into clinical practice and familiarization of health care providers with the same is essential to improve our shared decision-making practices

Shared decision making and the concept of equipoise: the competences of involving patients in healthcare choices.

Science.gov (United States)

Elwyn, G; Edwards, A; Kinnersley, P; Grol, R

2000-11-01

Involving patients in healthcare decisions makes a potentially significant and enduring difference to healthcare outcomes. One difficulty (among many) is that the 'involvement' of patients in decisions has been left undefined. It is usually conceptualised as 'patient centredness', which is a broad and variably interpreted concept that is difficult to assess using current tools. This paper attempts to gauge general practitioners' (GPs') attitudes to patient involvement in decision making and their views about the contextual factors, competences, and stages required to achieve shared decisions within consultations. To explore and understand what constitutes the appropriate involvement of patients in decision making within consultations, to consider previous theory in this field, and to propose a set of competences (skills) and steps that would enable clinical practitioners (generalists) to undertake 'shared decision making' in their clinical environment. Qualitative study using focus group interviews of key informants. Experienced GPs with educational roles have positive attitudes to the involvement of patients in decisions, provided the process matches the role individuals wish to play. They perceive some clinical problems as being more suited to a cooperative approach to decision making and conceptualised the existence of professional equipoise towards the existence of legitimate treatment options as an important facilitative factor. A sequence of skills was proposed as follows: 1) implicit or explicit involvement of patients in the decision-making process; 2) explore ideas, fears, and expectations of the problem and possible treatments; 3) portrayal of equipoise and options; 4) identify preferred data format and provide tailor-made information; 5) checking process: understanding of information and reactions (e.g. ideas, fears, and expectations of possible options); 6) acceptance of process and decision making role preference; 7) make, discuss or defer decisions; 8

A communication model of shared decision making: accounting for cancer treatment decisions.

Science.gov (United States)

Siminoff, Laura A; Step, Mary M

2005-07-01

The authors present a communication model of shared decision making (CMSDM) that explicitly identifies the communication process as the vehicle for decision making in cancer treatment. In this view, decision making is necessarily a sociocommunicative process whereby people enter into a relationship, exchange information, establish preferences, and choose a course of action. The model derives from contemporary notions of behavioral decision making and ethical conceptions of the doctor-patient relationship. This article briefly reviews the theoretical approaches to decision making, notes deficiencies, and embeds a more socially based process into the dynamics of the physician-patient relationship, focusing on cancer treatment decisions. In the CMSDM, decisions depend on (a) antecedent factors that have potential to influence communication, (b) jointly constructed communication climate, and (c) treatment preferences established by the physician and the patient.

Shared decision making in mental health: the importance for current clinical practice.

Science.gov (United States)

Alguera-Lara, Victoria; Dowsey, Michelle M; Ride, Jemimah; Kinder, Skye; Castle, David

2017-12-01

We reviewed the literature on shared decision making (regarding treatments in psychiatry), with a view to informing our understanding of the decision making process and the barriers that exist in clinical practice. Narrative review of published English-language articles. After culling, 18 relevant articles were included. Themes identified included models of psychiatric care, benefits for patients, and barriers. There is a paucity of published studies specifically related to antipsychotic medications. Shared decision making is a central part of the recovery paradigm and is of increasing importance in mental health service delivery. The field needs to better understand the basis on which decisions are reached regarding psychiatric treatments. Discrete choice experiments might be useful to inform the development of tools to assist shared decision making in psychiatry.

Shared decision-making as an existential journey: Aiming for restored autonomous capacity

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Gulbrandsen, P.; Clayman, M.L.; Beach, M.C.; Han, P.K.; Boss, E.F.; Ofstad, E.H.; Elwyn, G.

2016-01-01

OBJECTIVE: We describe the different ways in which illness represents an existential problem, and its implications for shared decision-making. METHODS: We explore core concepts of shared decision-making in medical encounters (uncertainty, vulnerability, dependency, autonomy, power, trust,

Confronting evidence: individualised care and the case for shared decision-making.

LENUS (Irish Health Repository)

Ryan, P

2014-11-01

In many clinical scenarios there exists more than one clinically appropriate intervention strategy. When these involve subjective trade-offs between potential benefits and harms, patients\\' preferences should inform decision-making. Shared decision-making is a collaborative process, where clinician and patient reconcile the best available evidence with respect for patients\\' individualized care preferences. In practice, clinicians may be poorly equipped to participate in this process. Shared decision-making is applicable to many conditions including stable coronary artery disease, end-of-life care, and numerous small decisions in chronic disease management. There is evidence of more clinically appropriate care patterns, improved patient understanding and sense of empowerment. Many trials reported a 20% reduction in major surgery in favour of conservative treatment, although demand tends to increase for some interventions. The generalizability of international evidence to Ireland is unclear. Considering the potential benefits, there is a case for implementing and evaluating shared decision-making pilot projects in Ireland.

Facilitators and constraints at each stage of the migration decision process.

Science.gov (United States)

Kley, Stefanie

2017-10-01

Behavioural models of migration emphasize the importance of migration decision-making for the explanation of subsequent behaviour. But empirical migration research regularly finds considerable gaps between those who intend to migrate and those who actually realize their intention. This paper applies the Theory of Planned Behaviour, enriched by the Rubicon model, to test specific hypotheses about distinct effects of facilitators and constraints on specific stages of migration decision-making and behaviour. The data come from a tailor-made panel survey based on random samples of people drawn from two German cities in 2006-07. The results show that in conventional models the effects of facilitators and constraints on migration decision-making are likely to be underestimated. Splitting the process of migration decision-making into a pre-decisional and a pre-actional phase helps to avoid bias in the estimated effects of facilitators and constraints on both migration decision-making and migration behaviour.

How is Shared Decision-Making Defined among African-Americans with Diabetes?

Science.gov (United States)

Peek, Monica E.; Quinn, Michael T.; Gorawara-Bhat, Rita; Odoms-Young, Angela; Wilson, Shannon C.; Chin, Marshall H.

2011-01-01

Objective This study investigates how shared decision-making (SDM) is defined by African-American patients with diabetes, and compares patients’ conceptualization of SDM with the Charles model. Methods We utilized race-concordant interviewers/moderators to conduct in-depth interviews and focus groups among a purposeful sample of African-American patients with diabetes. Each interview/focus group was audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and imported into Atlas.ti software. Coding was done using an iterative process and each transcription was independently coded by two members of the research team. Results Although the conceptual domains were similar, patient definitions of what it means to “share” in the decision-making process differed significantly from the Charles model of SDM. Patients stressed the value of being able to “tell their story and be heard” by physicians, emphasized the importance of information sharing rather than decision-making sharing, and included an acceptable role for non-adherence as a mechanism to express control and act on treatment preferences. Conclusion Current instruments may not accurately measure decision-making preferences of African-American patients with diabetes. Practice Implications Future research should develop instruments to effectively measure decision-making preferences within this population. Emphasizing information-sharing that validates patients’ experiences may be particularly meaningful to African-Americans with diabetes. PMID:18684581

Developing and pilot testing a shared decision-making intervention for dialysis choice.

Science.gov (United States)

Finderup, Jeanette; Jensen, Jens K D; Lomborg, Kirsten

2018-04-17

Evidence is inconclusive on how best to guide the patient in decision-making around haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis choice. International guidelines recommend involvement of the patient in the decision to choose the dialysis modality most suitable for the individual patient. Nevertheless, studies have shown lack of involvement of the patient in decision-making. To develop and pilot test an intervention for shared decision-making targeting the choice of dialysis modality. This study reflects the first two phases of a complex intervention design: phase 1, the development process and phase 2, feasibility and piloting. Because decision aids were a part of the intervention, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards were considered. The pilot test included both the intervention and the feasibility of the validated shared decision-making questionnaire (SDM Q9) and the Decision Quality Measure (DQM) applied to evaluate the intervention. A total of 137 patients tested the intervention. After the intervention, 80% of the patients chose dialysis at home reflecting an increase of 23% in starting dialysis at home prior to the study. The SDM Q9 showed the majority of the patients experienced this intervention as shared decision-making. An intervention based on shared decision-making supported by decision aids seemed to increase the number of patients choosing home dialysis. The SDM Q9 and DQM were feasible evaluation tools. Further research is needed to gain insight into the patients' experiences of involvement and the implications for their choice of dialysis modality. © 2018 European Dialysis and Transplant Nurses Association/European Renal Care Association.

Research in Brief: Shared Decision Making Enhances Instructional Leadership.

Science.gov (United States)

Lindle, Joan Clark

1992-01-01

A study of three middle school principals about their instructional leadership activities before and after the establishment of shared decision making revealed an enhancement of leadership. The nature of the middle school teacher's role demands participative leadership and communication and decision making revolved around instructional issues.…

Improving access to shared decision-making for Hispanics/Latinos with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Science.gov (United States)

Davidson, Jaime A; Rosales, Aracely; Shillington, Alicia C; Bailey, Robert A; Kabir, Chris; Umpierrez, Guillermo E

2015-01-01

To describe the cultural and linguistic adaptation and Spanish translation of an English-language patient decision aid (PDA) for use in supporting shared decision-making in Hispanics/Latinos with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), a group at a high risk for complications. A steering committee of endocrinologists, a primary care physician, a certified diabetes educator, and a dietician, each with extensive experience in providing care to Hispanics/Latinos was convened to assess a PDA developed for English-speaking patients with T2DM. English content was reviewed for cultural sensitivity and appropriateness for a Hispanic/Latino population. A consensus-building process and iterative version edits incorporated clinician perspectives. The content was adapted to be consistent with traditional Hispanic/Latino cultural communication precepts (eg, avoidance of hostile confrontation; value for warm interaction; respect for authority; value of family support for decisions). The PDA was translated by native-speaking individuals with diabetes expertise. The PDA underwent testing during cognitive interviews with ten Spanish-speaking Hispanics/Latinos with T2DM to ensure that the content is reflective of the experience, understanding, and language Hispanic/Latino patients use to describe diabetes and treatment. Content edits were made to assure a literacy level appropriate to the audience, and the PDA was produced for online video dissemination. High-quality, well-developed tools to facilitate shared decision-making in populations with limited access to culturally sensitive information can narrow gaps and align care with individual patient preferences. A newly developed PDA is available for shared decision-making that provides culturally appropriate treatment information for inadequately controlled Hispanics/Latinos with T2DM. The impact on the overall health of patients and care management of T2DM requires further study.

Translating shared decision-making into health care clinical practices: Proof of concepts.

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Legare, F.; Elwyn, G.; Fishbein, M.; Fremont, P.; Frosch, D.; Gagnon, M.P.; Kenny, D.A.; Labrecque, M.; Stacey, D.; St-Jacques, S.; Weijden, G.D.E.M. van der

2008-01-01

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: There is considerable interest today in shared decision-making (SDM), defined as a decision-making process jointly shared by patients and their health care provider. However, the data show that SDM has not been broadly adopted yet. Consequently, the main goal of this proposal

Creating and sharing clinical decision support content with Web 2.0: Issues and examples.

Science.gov (United States)

Wright, Adam; Bates, David W; Middleton, Blackford; Hongsermeier, Tonya; Kashyap, Vipul; Thomas, Sean M; Sittig, Dean F

2009-04-01

Clinical decision support is a powerful tool for improving healthcare quality and patient safety. However, developing a comprehensive package of decision support interventions is costly and difficult. If used well, Web 2.0 methods may make it easier and less costly to develop decision support. Web 2.0 is characterized by online communities, open sharing, interactivity and collaboration. Although most previous attempts at sharing clinical decision support content have worked outside of the Web 2.0 framework, several initiatives are beginning to use Web 2.0 to share and collaborate on decision support content. We present case studies of three efforts: the Clinfowiki, a world-accessible wiki for developing decision support content; Partners Healthcare eRooms, web-based tools for developing decision support within a single organization; and Epic Systems Corporation's Community Library, a repository for sharing decision support content for customers of a single clinical system vendor. We evaluate the potential of Web 2.0 technologies to enable collaborative development and sharing of clinical decision support systems through the lens of three case studies; analyzing technical, legal and organizational issues for developers, consumers and organizers of clinical decision support content in Web 2.0. We believe the case for Web 2.0 as a tool for collaborating on clinical decision support content appears strong, particularly for collaborative content development within an organization.

Patients' Perceptions and Experiences of Shared Decision-Making in Primary HIV Care Clinics.

Science.gov (United States)

Fuller, Shannon M; Koester, Kimberly A; Guinness, Ryan R; Steward, Wayne T

Shared decision-making (SDM) is considered best practice in health care. Prior studies have explored attitudes and barriers/facilitators to SDM, with few specific to HIV care. We interviewed 53 patients in HIV primary care clinics in California to understand the factors and situations that may promote or hinder engagement in SDM. Studies in other populations have found that patients' knowledge about their diseases and their trust in providers facilitated SDM. We found these features to be more nuanced for HIV. Perceptions of personal agency, knowledge about one's disease, and trust in provider were factors that could work for or against SDM. Overall, we found that participants described few experiences of SDM, especially among those with no comorbidities. Opportunities for SDM in routine HIV care (e.g., determining antiretroviral therapy) may arise infrequently because of treatment advances. These findings yield considerations for adapting SDM to fit the context of HIV care. Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Why shared decision making is not good enough: lessons from patients.

Science.gov (United States)

Olthuis, Gert; Leget, Carlo; Grypdonck, Mieke

2014-07-01

A closer look at the lived illness experiences of medical professionals themselves shows that shared decision making is in need of a logic of care. This paper underlines that medical decision making inevitably takes place in a messy and uncertain context in which sharing responsibilities may impose a considerable burden on patients. A better understanding of patients' lived experiences enables healthcare professionals to attune to what individual patients deem important in their lives.This will contribute to making medical decisions in a good and caring manner, taking into account the lived experience of being ill.

Shared decision-making to improve attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder care.

Science.gov (United States)

Brinkman, William B; Hartl Majcher, Jessica; Poling, Lauren M; Shi, Gaoyan; Zender, Mike; Sucharew, Heidi; Britto, Maria T; Epstein, Jeffery N

2013-10-01

To examine the effect of a shared decision-making intervention with parents of children newly diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Seven pediatricians participated in a pre/post open trial of decision aids for use before and during the office visit to discuss diagnosis and develop a treatment plan. Encounters pre- (n=21, control group) and post-intervention implementation (n=33, intervention group) were compared. We video-recorded encounters and surveyed parents. Compared to controls, intervention group parents were more involved in shared decision-making (31.2 vs. 43.8 on OPTION score, pdecision-making with parents. Parents were better informed about treatment options without increasing visit duration. Interventions are available to prepare parents for visits and enable physicians to elicit parent preferences and involvement in decision-making. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Prostate Cancer Patients' Understanding of the Gleason Scoring System: Implications for Shared Decision-Making.

Science.gov (United States)

Tagai, Erin K; Miller, Suzanne M; Kutikov, Alexander; Diefenbach, Michael A; Gor, Ronak A; Al-Saleem, Tahseen; Chen, David Y T; Fleszar, Sara; Roy, Gem

2018-01-15

The Gleason scoring system is a key component of a prostate cancer diagnosis, since it indicates disease aggressiveness. It also serves as a risk communication tool that facilitates shared treatment decision-making. However, the system is highly complex and therefore difficult to communicate: factors which have been shown to undermine well-informed and high-quality shared treatment decision-making. To systematically explore prostate cancer patients' understanding of the Gleason scoring system (GSS), we assessed knowledge and perceived importance among men who had completed treatment (N = 50). Patients were administered a survey that assessed patient knowledge and patients' perceived importance of the GSS, as well as demographics, medical factors (e.g., Gleason score at diagnosis), and health literacy. Bivariate analyses were conducted to identify associations with patient knowledge and perceived importance of the GSS. The sample was generally well-educated (48% with a bachelor's degree or higher) and health literate (M = 12.9, SD = 2.2, range = 3-15). Despite this, patient knowledge of the GSS was low (M = 1.8, SD = 1.4, range = 1-4). Patients' understanding of the importance of the GSS was moderate (M = 2.8, SD = 1.0, range = 0-4) and was positively associated with GSS knowledge (p decision-making. Future studies are needed to explore the potential utility of a simplified Gleason grading system and improved patient-provider communication.

Involved, inputting or informing: "Shared" decision making in adult mental health care.

Science.gov (United States)

Bradley, Eleanor; Green, Debra

2018-02-01

A diagnosis of serious mental illness can impact on the whole family. Families informally provide significant amounts of care but are disproportionately at risk of carer burden when compared to those supporting people with other long-term conditions. Shared decision making (SDM) is an ethical model of health communication associated with positive health outcomes; however, there has been little research to evaluate how routinely family is invited to participate in SDM, or what this looks like in practice. This UK study aimed to better understand how the family caregivers of those diagnosed with SMI are currently involved in decision making, particularly decisions about treatment options including prescribed medication. Objectives were to Explore the extent to which family members wish to be involved in decisions about prescribed medication Determine how and when professionals engage family in these decisions Identify barriers and facilitators associated with the engagement of family in decisions about treatment. Open-ended questions were sent to professionals and family members to elicit written responses. Qualitative responses were analysed thematically. Themes included the definition of involvement and "rules of engagement." Staff members are gatekeepers for family involvement, and the process is not democratic. Family and staff ascribe practical, rather than recovery-oriented roles to family, with pre-occupation around notions of adherence. Staff members need support, training and education to apply SDM. Time to exchange information is vital but practically difficult. Negotiated teams, comprising of staff, service users, family, peers as applicable, with ascribed roles and responsibilities could support SDM. © 2017 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Core competencies for shared decision making training programs: insights from an international, interdisciplinary working group.

Science.gov (United States)

Légaré, France; Moumjid-Ferdjaoui, Nora; Drolet, Renée; Stacey, Dawn; Härter, Martin; Bastian, Hilda; Beaulieu, Marie-Dominique; Borduas, Francine; Charles, Cathy; Coulter, Angela; Desroches, Sophie; Friedrich, Gwendolyn; Gafni, Amiram; Graham, Ian D; Labrecque, Michel; LeBlanc, Annie; Légaré, Jean; Politi, Mary; Sargeant, Joan; Thomson, Richard

2013-01-01

Shared decision making is now making inroads in health care professionals' continuing education curriculum, but there is no consensus on what core competencies are required by clinicians for effectively involving patients in health-related decisions. Ready-made programs for training clinicians in shared decision making are in high demand, but existing programs vary widely in their theoretical foundations, length, and content. An international, interdisciplinary group of 25 individuals met in 2012 to discuss theoretical approaches to making health-related decisions, compare notes on existing programs, take stock of stakeholders concerns, and deliberate on core competencies. This article summarizes the results of those discussions. Some participants believed that existing models already provide a sufficient conceptual basis for developing and implementing shared decision making competency-based training programs on a wide scale. Others argued that this would be premature as there is still no consensus on the definition of shared decision making or sufficient evidence to recommend specific competencies for implementing shared decision making. However, all participants agreed that there were 2 broad types of competencies that clinicians need for implementing shared decision making: relational competencies and risk communication competencies. Further multidisciplinary research could broaden and deepen our understanding of core competencies for shared decision making training. Copyright © 2013 The Alliance for Continuing Education in the Health Professions, the Society for Academic Continuing Medical Education, and the Council on CME, Association for Hospital Medical Education.

Shared decision-making using personal health record technology: a scoping review at the crossroads.

Science.gov (United States)

Davis, Selena; Roudsari, Abdul; Raworth, Rebecca; Courtney, Karen L; MacKay, Lee

2017-07-01

This scoping review aims to determine the size and scope of the published literature on shared decision-making (SDM) using personal health record (PHR) technology and to map the literature in terms of system design and outcomes. Literature from Medline, Google Scholar, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Engineering Village, and Web of Science (2005-2015) using the search terms "personal health records," "shared decision making," "patient-provider communication," "decision aid," and "decision support" was included. Articles ( n  = 38) addressed the efficacy or effectiveness of PHRs for SDM in engaging patients in self-care and decision-making or ways patients can be supported in SDM via PHR. Analysis resulted in an integrated SDM-PHR conceptual framework. An increased interest in SDM via PHR is apparent, with 55% of articles published within last 3 years. Sixty percent of the literature originates from the United States. Twenty-six articles address a particular clinical condition, with 10 focused on diabetes, and one-third offer empirical evidence of patient outcomes. The tethered and standalone PHR architectural types were most studied, while the interconnected PHR type was the focus of more recently published methodological approaches and discussion articles. The study reveals a scarcity of rigorous research on SDM via PHR. Research has focused on one or a few of the SDM elements and not on the intended complete process. Just as PHR technology designed on an interconnected architecture has the potential to facilitate SDM, integrating the SDM process into PHR technology has the potential to drive PHR value. © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

Factors influencing the surgical decision for the treatment of degenerative lumbar stenosis in a preference-based shared decision-making process.

Science.gov (United States)

Kim, Ho-Joong; Park, Jae-Young; Kang, Kyoung-Tak; Chang, Bong-Soon; Lee, Choon-Ki; Yeom, Jin S

2015-02-01

In a preference-based shared decision-making system, several subjective and/or objective factors such as pain severity, degree of disability, and the radiological severity of canal stenosis may influence the final surgical decision for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). However, our understanding of the shared decision-making process and the significance of each factor remain primitive. In the present study, we aimed to investigate which factors influence the surgical decision for the treatment of LSS when using a preference-based, shared decision-making process. We included 555 patients, aged 45-80 years, who used a preference-based shared decision-making process and were treated conservatively or surgically for chronic leg and/or back pain caused by LSS from April 2012 to December 2012. Univariate and multivariable-adjusted logistic regression analyses were used to assess the association of surgical decision making with age, sex, body mass index, symptom duration, radiologic stenotic grade, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain, Short Form-36 (SF-36) subscales, and motor weakness. In univariate analysis, the following variables were associated with a higher odds of a surgical decision for LSS: male sex; the VAS score for leg pain; ODI; morphological stenotic grades B, C, and D; motor weakness; and the physical function, physical role, bodily pain, social function, and emotional role of the SF-36 subscales. Multivariate analysis revealed that male sex, ODI, morphological stenotic grades C and D, and motor weakness were significantly associated with a higher possibility of a surgical decision. Motor weakness, male sex, morphological stenotic grade, and the amount of disability are critical factors leading to a surgical decision for LSS when using a preference-based shared decision-making process.

BCG-vaccination of newborns – a descriptive study about shared decision making and decisional conflicts

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Thybo Pihl, Gitte

BCG-vaccination of newborns – a descriptive study about shared decision making and decisional conflicts Objective: To evaluate the use of shared decision making to support the parent in a low-evidence decision about a vaccine when using telephone consultations. The present study was conducted........ The principles included promoting trust through transparency and creating “shared minds” regarding uncertainties about the evidence. O’Connor’s Decisional Conflict Scale was used to identify decisional conflicts after the process of shared decision making. Findings: A decisional conflict score was obtained...... on the phone based on their need and wishes, this uncertainty about the best choice might reflect the principle of letting parents make an autonomous decision in combination with low evidence for the benefits of BCG. The process of sharing responsibility and the impact of the health care providers’ attitude...

Patient Preferences regarding Shared Decision-making in the Emergency Department: Findings from a multi-site survey.

Science.gov (United States)

Schoenfeld, Elizabeth M; Kanzaria, Hemal K; Quigley, Denise D; Marie, Peter St; Nayyar, Nikita; Sabbagh, Sarah H; Gress, Kyle L; Probst, Marc A

2018-06-13

As Shared Decision-Making (SDM) has received increased attention as a method to improve the patient-centeredness of emergency department (ED) care, we sought to determine patients' desired level of involvement in medical decisions and their perceptions of potential barriers and facilitators to SDM in the ED. We surveyed a cross-sectional sample of adult ED patients at three academic medical centers across the United States. The survey included 32 items regarding patient involvement in medical decisions including a modified Control Preference Scale (CPS) and questions about barriers and facilitators to SDM in the ED. Items were developed and refined based on prior literature and qualitative interviews with ED patients. Research assistants administered the survey in person. Of 797 patients approached, 661 (83%) agreed to participate. Participants were 52% female, 45% white, and 30% Hispanic. The majority of respondents (85-92%, depending on decision type) expressed a desire for some degree of involvement in decision-making in the ED, while 8-15% preferred to leave decision-making to their physician alone. Ninety-eight percent wanted to be involved with decisions when "something serious is going on." The majority of patients (94%) indicated that self-efficacy was not a barrier to SDM in the ED. However, most patients (55%) reported a tendency to defer to the physician's decision-making during an ED visit, with about half reporting they would wait for a physician to ask them to be involved. We found the majority of ED patients in our large, diverse sample wanted to be involved in medical decisions, especially in the case of a "serious" medical problem, and felt that they had the ability to do so. Nevertheless, many patients were unlikely to actively seek involvement and defaulted to allowing the physician to make decisions during the ED visit. After fully explaining the consequences of a decision, clinicians should make an effort to explicitly ascertain patients

Shared decision making for psychiatric medication management: beyond the micro-social.

Science.gov (United States)

Morant, Nicola; Kaminskiy, Emma; Ramon, Shulamit

2016-10-01

Mental health care has lagged behind other health-care domains in developing and applying shared decision making (SDM) for treatment decisions. This is despite compatibilities with ideals of modern mental health care such as self-management and recovery-oriented practice, and growing policy-level interest. Psychiatric medication is a mainstay of mental health treatment, but there are known problems with prescribing practices, and service users report feeling uninvolved in medication decisions and concerned about adverse effects. SDM has potential to produce better tailoring of psychiatric medication to individuals' needs. This conceptual review argues that several aspects of mental health care that differ from other health-care contexts (e.g. forms of coercion, questions about service users' insight and disempowerment) may impact on processes and possibilities for SDM. It is therefore problematic to uncritically import models of SDM developed in other health-care contexts. We argue that decision making for psychiatric medication is better understood in a broader way that moves beyond the micro-social focus of a medical consultation. Contextualizing specific medication-related consultations within longer term relationships, and broader service systems enables recognition of the multiple processes, actors and agendas that shape how psychiatric medication is prescribed, managed and used, and which may facilitate or impede SDM. A broad conceptualization of decision making for psychiatric medication that moves beyond the micro-social can account for why SDM in this domain remains a rarity. It has both conceptual and practical utility for evaluating research evidence, identifying future research priorities and highlighting fruitful ways of developing and implementing SDM in mental health care. © 2015 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Enhancing Group Decision Making: An Exercise to Reduce Shared Information Bias

Science.gov (United States)

Baker, Diane F.

2010-01-01

Research on shared information bias has shown that group members involved in a decision-making task tend to undervalue information that a single member shares with the group, especially when that information conflicts with their prior conclusions. The group activity in this article is intended to heighten awareness of this shared information bias…

Involvement of people with dementia in making decisions about their lives: a qualitative study that appraises shared decision-making concerning daycare.

Science.gov (United States)

Groen-van de Ven, Leontine; Smits, Carolien; de Graaff, Fuusje; Span, Marijke; Eefsting, Jan; Jukema, Jan; Vernooij-Dassen, Myrra

2017-11-12

To explore how people with dementia, their informal caregivers and their professionals participate in decision making about daycare and to develop a typology of participation trajectories. A qualitative study with a prospective, multiperspective design, based on 244 semistructured interviews, conducted during three interview rounds over the course of a year. Analysis was by means of content analysis and typology construction. Community settings and nursing homes in the Netherlands. 19 people with dementia, 36 of their informal caregivers and 38 of their professionals (including nurses, daycare employees and case managers). The participants' responses related to three critical points in the decision-making trajectory about daycare: (1) the initial positive or negative expectations of daycare; (2) negotiation about trying out daycare by promoting, resisting or attuning to others; and (3) trying daycare, which resulted in positive or negative reactions from people with dementia and led to a decision. The ways in which care networks proceeded through these three critical points resulted in a typology of participation trajectories, including (1) working together positively toward daycare, (2) bringing conflicting perspectives together toward trying daycare and (3) not reaching commitment to try daycare. Shared decision making with people with dementia is possible and requires and adapted process of decision making. Our results show that initial preferences based on information alone may change when people with dementia experience daycare. It is important to have a try-out period so that people with dementia can experience daycare without having to decide whether to continue it. Whereas shared decision making in general aims at moving from initial preferences to informed preferences, professionals should focus more on moving from initial preferences to experienced preferences for people with dementia. Professionals can play a crucial role in facilitating the

Physician as partner or salesman? Shared decision-making in real-time encounters.

Science.gov (United States)

Karnieli-Miller, Orit; Eisikovits, Zvi

2009-07-01

The results of recent research have led to the increased advocacy of shared decision-making regarding medical treatment. Nonetheless, only a limited number of studies have focused on the process of decision-making in real-time encounters. The present paper aims to document and analyze this process. Specifically, we assess whether these decisions are the result of partnership or of persuasive tactics based on power and hierarchical relationships. We will describe and analyze different strategies used by pediatric gastroenterologists in breaking bad news encounters, as well as their consequences. The analysis is based on a multi-method, multi-participant phenomenological study on breaking bad news to adolescents and their families regarding a chronic illness. It included 17 units of analysis (actual encounters and 52 interviews with physicians, parents and adolescents). Data were collected from three hospitals in Northern Israel using observations and audiotapes of diagnosis disclosure encounters and audio-taped interviews with all participants. The analysis identified eight different presentation tactics used in actual encounters during which physicians made various use of language, syntax and different sources of power to persuade patients to agree with their preferred treatment choice. The tactics included various ways of presenting the illness, treatment and side effects; providing examples from other success or failure stories; sharing the decision only concerning technicalities; and using plurals and authority. The findings suggest that shared decision-making may be advocated as a philosophical tenet or a value, but it is not necessarily implemented in actual communication with patients. Rather, treatment decisions tend to be unilaterally made, and a variety of persuasive approaches are used to ensure agreement with the physician's recommendation. The discussion is focused on the complexity of sharing a decision, especially in the initial bad news encounter

Promoting Shared Decision Making through Descriptive Inquiry

Science.gov (United States)

Seher, Rachel; Traugh, Cecelia; Cheng, Alan

2018-01-01

This article shows how City-As-School, a progressive public school in New York City, used descriptive inquiry to deepen shared decision making, which is a central value of the school and part of a democratic way of life. Descriptive inquiry is a democratic knowledge-making process that was developed at the Prospect School in North Bennington,…

Can shared decision-making reduce medical malpractice litigation? A systematic review.

Science.gov (United States)

Durand, Marie-Anne; Moulton, Benjamin; Cockle, Elizabeth; Mann, Mala; Elwyn, Glyn

2015-04-18

To explore the likely influence and impact of shared decision-making on medical malpractice litigation and patients' intentions to initiate litigation. We included all observational, interventional and qualitative studies published in all languages, which assessed the effect or likely influence of shared decision-making or shared decision-making interventions on medical malpractice litigation or on patients' intentions to litigate. The following databases were searched from inception until January 2014: CINAHL, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, HMIC, Lexis library, MEDLINE, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Open SIGLE, PsycINFO and Web of Knowledge. We also hand searched reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field. Downs & Black quality assessment checklist, the Critical Appraisal Skill Programme qualitative tool, and the Critical Appraisal Guidelines for single case study research were used to assess the quality of included studies. 6562 records were screened and 19 articles were retrieved for full-text review. Five studies wee included in the review. Due to the number and heterogeneity of included studies, we conducted a narrative synthesis adapted from the ESRC guidance for narrative synthesis. Four themes emerged. The analysis confirms the absence of empirical data necessary to determine whether or not shared decision-making promoted in the clinical encounter can reduce litigation. Three out of five included studies provide retrospective and simulated data suggesting that ignoring or failing to diagnose patient preferences, particularly when no effort has been made to inform and support understanding of possible harms and benefits, puts clinicians at a higher risk of litigation. Simulated scenarios suggest that documenting the use of decision support interventions in patients' notes could offer some level of medico-legal protection. Our analysis also indicated that a sizeable

Shared decision-making in the paediatric field: a literature review and concept analysis.

Science.gov (United States)

Park, Eun Sook; Cho, In Young

2017-09-13

The concept of shared decision-making is poorly defined and often used interchangeably with related terms. The aim of this study was to delineate and clarify the concept of shared decision-making in the paediatric field. Rodgers and Knafl's evolutionary concept analysis was used to delineate and clarify the concept. Following a search of the CINAHL, PubMed and MEDLINE databases and online journals between 1995 and 2016, we included a total of 42 articles that referred to shared decision-making in the paediatric field. The attributes included active participation of the three: parents, children and health professionals; collaborative partnership; reaching a compromise; and common goal for child's health. Antecedents were existing several options with different possible outcomes; substantial decisional conflict; recognising child's health situations that decision-making is needed; and willingness to participate in decision-making. Finally, the consequences included decreased decisional conflict; mutual empowerment; improved child health status; and improved quality of paediatric health care. This study provides a theoretical understanding of the concept of shared decision-making in the paediatric field; furthermore, by integrating this concept into paediatric practice, it may help to reduce the gap between theory and practice. The analysis could also provide nursing researchers with insight into paediatric decision-making and establish a foundation to develop future interventions and situation-specific theory for promoting high-quality decision-making in the paediatric field. © 2017 Nordic College of Caring Science.

Use of implicit persuasion in decision making about adjuvant cancer treatment: A potential barrier to shared decision making

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Engelhardt, Ellen G.; Pieterse, Arwen H.; van der Hout, Anja; de Haes, Hanneke J. C. J. M.; Kroep, Judith R.; Quarles van Ufford-Mannesse, Patricia; Portielje, Johanneke E. A.; Smets, Ellen M. A.; Stiggelbout, Anne M.

2016-01-01

Shared decision making (SDM) is widely advocated, especially for preference-sensitive decisions like those on adjuvant treatment for early-stage cancer. Here, decision making involves a subjective trade-off between benefits and side-effects, and therefore, patients' informed preferences should be

Feasibility and acceptability of shared decision-making to promote alcohol behavior change among women Veterans: Results from focus groups.

Science.gov (United States)

Abraham, Traci H; Wright, Patricia; White, Penny; Booth, Brenda M; Cucciare, Michael A

2017-01-01

Although rates of unhealthy drinking are high among women Veterans with mental health comorbidities, most women Veterans with mental comorbidities who present to primary care with unhealthy drinking do not receive alcohol-related care. Barriers to alcohol-related treatment could be reduced through patient-centered approaches to care, such as shared decision-making. We assessed the feasibility and acceptability of a telephone-delivered shared decision-making intervention for promoting alcohol behavior change in women Veterans with unhealthy drinking and co-morbid depression and/or probable post-traumatic stress disorder. We used 3, 2-hour focus group discussions with 19 women Veterans to identify barriers and solicit recommendations for using the intervention with women Veterans who present to primary care with unhealthy drinking and mental health comorbidities. Transcripts from the focus groups were qualitatively analyzed using template analysis. Although participants perceived that the intervention was feasible and acceptable for the targeted patient population, they identified the treatment delivery modality, length of telephone sessions, and some of the option grid content as potential barriers. Facilitators included strategies for enhancing the telephone-delivered shared decision-making sessions and diversifying the treatment options contained in the option grids. Focus group feedback resulted in preliminary adaptations to the intervention that are mindful of women Veterans' individual preferences for care and realistic in the everyday context of their busy lives.

Addressing Barriers to Shared Decision Making Among Latino LGBTQ Patients and Healthcare Providers in Clinical Settings.

Science.gov (United States)

Baig, Arshiya A; Lopez, Fanny Y; DeMeester, Rachel H; Jia, Justin L; Peek, Monica E; Vela, Monica B

2016-10-01

Effective shared decision making (SDM) between patients and healthcare providers has been positively associated with health outcomes. However, little is known about the SDM process between Latino patients who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ), and their healthcare providers. Our review of the literature identified unique aspects of Latino LGBTQ persons' culture, health beliefs, and experiences that may affect their ability to engage in SDM with their healthcare providers. Further research needs to examine Latino LGBTQ patient-provider experiences with SDM and develop tools that can better facilitate SDM in this patient population.

Implementing shared decision-making in routine practice: barriers and opportunities.

Science.gov (United States)

Holmes-Rovner, Margaret; Valade, Diane; Orlowski, Catherine; Draus, Catherine; Nabozny-Valerio, Barbara; Keiser, Susan

2000-09-01

OBJECTIVE: Determine feasibility of shared decision-making programmes in fee-for-service hospital systems including physicians' offices and in-patient facilities. DESIGN: Survey and participant observation. Data obtained during Phase 1 of a patient outcome study. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: Three hospitals in Michigan: one 299-bed rural regional hospital, one 650-bed urban community hospital, one 459-bed urban and suburban teaching hospital. All nurses and physicians who agreed to use the programmes participated in the evaluation (n = 34). INTERVENTION: Two shared decision-making(R) (SDP) multimedia programmes: surgical treatment choice for breast cancer and ischaemic heart disease treatment choice. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) clinicians' evaluations of programme quality; (2) challenges in hospital settings; and (3) patient referral rates. RESULTS: SDP programmes were judged to be clear, accurate and about the right length and amount of information. Programmes were judged to be informative and appropriate for patients to see before making a decision. Clinicians were neutral about patients' desire to participate in treatment decision-making. Referral volume to SDPs was lower than expected: 24 patients in 7 months across three hospitals. Implementation challenges centred on time pressures in patient care. CONCLUSIONS: Productivity and time pressure in US health care severely constrain shared decision-making programme implementation. Physician referral may not be a reliable mechanism for patient access. Possible innovations include: (1) incorporation into the informed consent process; (2) provider or payer negotiated requirement in the routine hospital procedure to use the SDP as a quality indicator; and (3) payer reimbursement to professional providers who make SDP programmes available to patients.

Implementing shared decision-making: consider all the consequences

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Elwyn, G.; Frosch, D.L.; Kobrin, S.

2016-01-01

BACKGROUND: The ethical argument that shared decision-making is "the right" thing to do, however laudable, is unlikely to change how healthcare is organized, just as evidence alone will be an insufficient factor: practice change is governed by factors such as cost, profit margin, quality, and

Developing and pilot testing a shared decision-making intervention for dialysis choice

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Finderup, Jeanette; Jensen, Jens Dam; Lomborg, Kirsten

2018-01-01

. Nevertheless, studies have shown lack of involvement of the patient in decision-making. Objectives: To develop and pilot test an intervention for shared decision-making targeting the choice of dialysis modality. Methods: This study reflects the first two phases of a complex intervention design: phase 1......, the development process and phase 2, feasibility and piloting. Because decision aids were a part of the intervention, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards were considered. The pilot test included both the intervention and the feasibility of the validated shared decision-making questionnaire (SDM Q9......) and the Decision Quality Measure (DQM) applied to evaluate the intervention. Results: A total of 137 patients tested the intervention. After the intervention, 80% of the patients chose dialysis at home reflecting an increase of 23% in starting dialysis at home prior to the study. The SDM Q9 showed the majority...

Shared decision-making in Israel: status, barriers, and recommendations

OpenAIRE

Miron-Shatz, Talya; Golan, Ofra; Brezis, Mayer; Siegal, Gil; Doniger, Glen M

2012-01-01

Abstract Shared decision making (SDM) - involving patients in decisions relevant to their health - has been increasingly influential in medical thought and practice around the world. This paper reviews the current status of SDM in Israel, including efforts to promote SDM in the legislation and healthcare system, its influence in medical training and the national health plans, and funding for SDM-related research. Published studies of SDM in Israel are also reviewed. Although informed consent ...

Shared decision-making and health for First Nations, Métis and Inuit women: a study protocol

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jull Janet

2012-12-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background Little is known about shared decision-making (SDM with Métis, First Nations and Inuit women (“Aboriginal women”. SDM is a collaborative process that engages health care professional(s and the client in making health decisions and is fundamental for informed consent and patient-centred care. The objective of this study is to explore Aboriginal women’s health and social decision-making needs and to engage Aboriginal women in culturally adapting an SDM approach. Methods Using participatory research principles and guided by a postcolonial theoretical lens, the proposed mixed methods research will involve three phases. Phase I is an international systematic review of the effectiveness of interventions for Aboriginal peoples’ health decision-making. Developed following dialogue with key stakeholders, proposed methods are guided by the Cochrane handbook and include a comprehensive search, screening by two independent researchers, and synthesis of findings. Phases II and III will be conducted in collaboration with Minwaashin Lodge and engage an urban Aboriginal community of women in an interpretive descriptive qualitative study. In Phase II, 10 to 13 Aboriginal women will be interviewed to explore their health/social decision-making experiences. The interview guide is based on the Ottawa Decision Support Framework and previous decisional needs assessments, and as appropriate may be adapted to findings from the systematic review. Digitally-recorded interviews will be transcribed verbatim and analyzed inductively to identify participant decision-making approaches and needs when making health/social decisions. In Phase III, there will be cultural adaptation of an SDM facilitation tool, the Ottawa Personal Decision Guide, by two focus groups consisting of five to seven Aboriginal women. The culturally adapted guide will undergo usability testing through individual interviews with five to six women who are about to make a health

Shared decision-making in home-care from the nurse's perspective: sitting at the kitchen table--a qualitative descriptive study.

Science.gov (United States)

Truglio-Londrigan, Marie

2013-10-01

To come to know, understand and describe the experience of shared decision-making in home-care from the nurse's perspective. The literature presents the concept of shared decision-making as a complex process characterised by a partnership between the healthcare provider and the patient, which is participatory and action oriented with education and negotiation leading to agreement. Few studies have been carried out to explore and describe the events that make up the experiences of shared decision-making in home-care from the nurse's perspective. A qualitative descriptive study was implemented. Semi structured interviews were performed with 10 home-care nurses who were asked to reflect on a time in their practice when they were involved in a shared decision-making process with their patient. All data were analysed using Colaizzi's method. The following Themes were uncovered: Begin where the patient is; Education for shared decision-making; The village and shared decision-making; and Whose decision is it? Each of the four Themes contained Subthemes. The findings of this study present shared decision-making as a complex, multidimensional and fluid process. A thorough understanding of shared decision-making is essential within the multiple contexts in which care is delivered. Nurses in clinical practice need to know and understand the events of the experience of shared decision-making. A more comprehensive understanding of these facts can assist home-care nurses in their practice with regard to the application of shared decision-making. © 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Shared Decision-making in Early Adopting Lung Cancer Screening Programs: a Qualitative Study.

Science.gov (United States)

Wiener, Renda Soylemez; Koppelman, Elisa; Bolton, Rendelle; Lasser, Karen E; Borrelli, Belinda; Au, David H; Slatore, Christopher G; Clark, Jack A; Kathuria, Hasmeena

2018-02-21

Guidelines recommend, and Medicare requires, shared decision-making between patients and clinicians before referring individuals at high risk of lung cancer for chest CT screening. However, little is known about the extent to which shared decision-making about lung cancer screening is achieved in real-world settings. To characterize patient and clinician impressions of early experiences with communication and decision-making about lung cancer screening and perceived barriers to achieving shared decision-making. Qualitative study entailing semi-structured interviews and focus groups. We enrolled 36 clinicians who refer patients for lung cancer screening and 49 patients who had undergone lung cancer screening in the prior year. Participants were recruited from lung cancer screening programs at four hospitals (three Veterans Health Administration, one urban safety net). Using content analysis, we analyzed transcripts to characterize communication and decision-making about lung cancer screening. Our analysis focused on the recommended components of shared decision-making (information sharing, deliberation, and decision aid use) and barriers to achieving shared decision-making. Clinicians varied in the information shared with patients, and did not consistently incorporate decision aids. Clinicians believed they explained the rationale and gave some (often purposely limited) information about the trade-offs of lung cancer screening. By contrast, some patients reported receiving little information about screening or its trade-offs and did not realize the CT was intended as a screening test for lung cancer. Clinicians and patients alike did not perceive that significant deliberation typically occurred. Clinicians perceived insufficient time, competing priorities, difficulty accessing decision aids, limited patient comprehension, and anticipated patient emotions as barriers to realizing shared decision-making. Due to multiple perceived barriers, patient

Shared decision-making in medical encounters regarding breast cancer treatment: the contribution of methodological triangulation.

Science.gov (United States)

Durif-Bruckert, C; Roux, P; Morelle, M; Mignotte, H; Faure, C; Moumjid-Ferdjaoui, N

2015-07-01

The aim of this study on shared decision-making in the doctor-patient encounter about surgical treatment for early-stage breast cancer, conducted in a regional cancer centre in France, was to further the understanding of patient perceptions on shared decision-making. The study used methodological triangulation to collect data (both quantitative and qualitative) about patient preferences in the context of a clinical consultation in which surgeons followed a shared decision-making protocol. Data were analysed from a multi-disciplinary research perspective (social psychology and health economics). The triangulated data collection methods were questionnaires (n = 132), longitudinal interviews (n = 47) and observations of consultations (n = 26). Methodological triangulation revealed levels of divergence and complementarity between qualitative and quantitative results that suggest new perspectives on the three inter-related notions of decision-making, participation and information. Patients' responses revealed important differences between shared decision-making and participation per se. The authors note that subjecting patients to a normative behavioural model of shared decision-making in an era when paradigms of medical authority are shifting may undermine the patient's quest for what he or she believes is a more important right: a guarantee of the best care available. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Stakeholders apply the GRADE evidence-to-decision framework to facilitate coverage decisions.

Science.gov (United States)

Dahm, Philipp; Oxman, Andrew D; Djulbegovic, Benjamin; Guyatt, Gordon H; Murad, M Hassan; Amato, Laura; Parmelli, Elena; Davoli, Marina; Morgan, Rebecca L; Mustafa, Reem A; Sultan, Shahnaz; Falck-Ytter, Yngve; Akl, Elie A; Schünemann, Holger J

2017-06-01

Coverage decisions are complex and require the consideration of many factors. A well-defined, transparent process could improve decision-making and facilitate decision-maker accountability. We surveyed key US-based stakeholders regarding their current approaches for coverage decisions. Then, we held a workshop to test an evidence-to-decision (EtD) framework for coverage based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. A total of 42 individuals (including 19 US stakeholders as well as international health policymakers and GRADE working group members) attended the workshop. Of the 19 stakeholders, 14 (74%) completed the survey before the workshop. Almost all of their organizations (13 of 14; 93%) used systematic reviews for coverage decision-making; few (2 of 14; 14%) developed their own evidence synthesis; a majority (9 of 14; 64%) rated the certainty of evidence (using various systems); almost all (13 of 14; 93%) denied formal consideration of resource use; and half (7 of 14; 50%) reported explicit criteria for decision-making. At the workshop, stakeholders successfully applied the EtD framework to four case studies and provided narrative feedback, which centered on contextual factors affecting coverage decisions in the United States, the need for reliable data on subgroups of patients, and the challenge of decision-making without formal consideration of resource use. Stakeholders successfully applied the EtD framework to four case studies and highlighted contextual factors affecting coverage decisions and affirmed its value. Their input informed the further development of a revised EtD framework, now publicly available (http://gradepro.org/). Published by Elsevier Inc.

Can streamlined multi-criteria decision analysis be used to implement shared decision making for colorectal cancer screening?

Science.gov (United States)

Dolan, James G.; Boohaker, Emily; Allison, Jeroan; Imperiale, Thomas F.

2013-01-01

Background Current US colorectal cancer screening guidelines that call for shared decision making regarding the choice among several recommended screening options are difficult to implement. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is an established methodology well suited for supporting shared decision making. Our study goal was to determine if a streamlined form of MCDA using rank order based judgments can accurately assess patients’ colorectal cancer screening priorities. Methods We converted priorities for four decision criteria and three sub-criteria regarding colorectal cancer screening obtained from 484 average risk patients using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in a prior study into rank order-based priorities using rank order centroids. We compared the two sets of priorities using Spearman rank correlation and non-parametric Bland-Altman limits of agreement analysis. We assessed the differential impact of using the rank order-based versus the AHP-based priorities on the results of a full MCDA comparing three currently recommended colorectal cancer screening strategies. Generalizability of the results was assessed using Monte Carlo simulation. Results Correlations between the two sets of priorities for the seven criteria ranged from 0.55 to 0.92. The proportions of absolute differences between rank order-based and AHP-based priorities that were more than ± 0.15 ranged from 1% to 16%. Differences in the full MCDA results were minimal and the relative rankings of the three screening options were identical more than 88% of the time. The Monte Carlo simulation results were similar. Conclusion Rank order-based MCDA could be a simple, practical way to guide individual decisions and assess population decision priorities regarding colorectal cancer screening strategies. Additional research is warranted to further explore the use of these methods for promoting shared decision making. PMID:24300851

Consumer satisfaction with psychiatric services: The role of shared decision making and the therapeutic relationship.

Science.gov (United States)

Klingaman, Elizabeth A; Medoff, Deborah R; Park, Stephanie G; Brown, Clayton H; Fang, Lijuan; Dixon, Lisa B; Hack, Samantha M; Tapscott, Stephanie L; Walsh, Mary Brighid; Kreyenbuhl, Julie A

2015-09-01

Although dissatisfaction is a primary reason for disengagement from outpatient psychiatric care among consumers with serious mental illnesses, little is known about predictors of their satisfaction with medication management visits. The primary purpose of this study was to explore how dimensions of consumer preferences for shared decision making (i.e., preferences for obtaining knowledge about one's mental illness, being offered and asked one's opinion about treatment options, and involvement in treatment decisions) and the therapeutic relationship (i.e., positive collaboration and type of clinician input) were related to visit satisfaction. Participants were 228 Veterans with serious mental illnesses who completed a 19-item self-report questionnaire assessing satisfaction with visits to prescribers (524 assessments) immediately after visits. In this correlational design, a 3-level mixed model with the restricted maximum likelihood estimation procedure was used to examine shared decision-making preferences and therapeutic alliance as predictors of visit satisfaction. Preferences for involvement in treatment decisions was the unique component of shared decision making associated with satisfaction, such that the more consumers desired involvement, the less satisfied they were. Positive collaboration and prescriber input were associated with greater visit satisfaction. When consumers with serious mental illnesses express preferences to be involved in shared decision making, it may not be sufficient to only provide information and treatment options; prescribers should attend to consumers' interest in involvement in actual treatment decisions. Assessment and tailoring of treatment approaches to consumer preferences for shared decision making should occur within the context of a strong therapeutic relationship. (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).

Hidden profiles and concealed information: strategic information sharing and use in group decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Toma, Claudia; Butera, Fabrizio

2009-06-01

Two experiments investigated the differential impact of cooperation and competition on strategic information sharing and use in a three-person group decision-making task. Information was distributed in order to create a hidden profile so that disconfirmation of group members' initial preferences was required to solve the task. Experiment 1 revealed that competition, compared to cooperation, led group members to withhold unshared information, a difference that was not significant for shared information. In competition, compared to cooperation, group members were also more reluctant to disconfirm their initial preferences. Decision quality was lower in competition than in cooperation, this effect being mediated by disconfirmation use and not by information sharing. Experiment 2 replicated these findings and revealed the role of mistrust in predicting strategic information sharing and use in competition. These results support a motivated information processing approach of group decision making.

Shared Decision Making: The Need For Patient-Clinician Conversation, Not Just Information.

Science.gov (United States)

Hargraves, Ian; LeBlanc, Annie; Shah, Nilay D; Montori, Victor M

2016-04-01

The growth of shared decision making has been driven largely by the understanding that patients need information and choices regarding their health care. But while these are important elements for patients who make decisions in partnership with their clinicians, our experience suggests that they are not enough to address the larger issue: the need for the patient and clinician to jointly create a course of action that is best for the individual patient and his or her family. The larger need in evidence-informed shared decision making is for a patient-clinician interaction that offers conversation, not just information, and care, not just choice. Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.

Shared decision making in ante- & postnatal care – focus on communication skills training

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Nielsen, Annegrethe; Yding, Annika; Skovsted, Katrine Brander

In recent years political focus has increasingly been on patient involvement in decisions in healthcare. One challenge in implementing the principles of shared decision making is to develop suitable communication practice in the clinical encounters between patients and healthcare providers....... A project where a group of midwives and nurses worked together in a serial of workshops training communication skills suitable for involving women in decisions in ante- and postnatal care was conducted in 2015. Communication skills training involved group analysis of videos of real consultations...... and a variety of roleplays and rehearsals of communication situations. Besides training communication skills the project aimed at documenting institutional practices obstructive to the purpose of sharing decisions....

Shared governance in a clinic system.

Science.gov (United States)

Meyers, Michelle M; Costanzo, Cindy

2015-01-01

Shared governance in health care empowers nurses to share in the decision-making process, which results in decentralized management and collective accountability. Share governance practices have been present in hospitals since the late 1970s. However, shared governance in ambulatory care clinics has not been well established. The subjects of this quality project included staff and administrative nurses in a clinic system. The stakeholder committee chose what model of shared governance to implement and educated clinic staff. The Index of Professional Nursing Governance measured a shared governance score pre- and postimplementation of the Clinic Nursing Council. The Clinic Nursing Council met bimonthly for 3 months during this project to discuss issues and make decisions related to nursing staff. The Index of Professional Nursing Governance scores indicated traditional governance pre- and postimplementation of the Clinic Nursing Council, which is to be expected. The stakeholder committee was beneficial to the initial implementation process and facilitated staff nurse involvement. Shared governance is an evolutionary process that develops empowered nurses and nurse leaders.

A Shared Decision-Making Approach to Telemedicine: Engaging Rural Patients in Glycemic Management

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Michelle L. Griffith

2016-11-01

Full Text Available Telemedicine can connect specialist health care providers with patients in remote and underserved areas. It is especially relevant in diabetes care, where a proliferation of treatment options has added further complexity to the care of an already complex, highly prevalent disease. Recent developments in health reform encourage delivery systems to use team-based models and engage patients in shared decision-making (SDM, where patients and providers together make health care decisions that are tailored to the specific characteristics and values of the patient. The goal of this project was to design, integrate, and evaluate a team-based, SDM approach delivered to patients with diabetes in a rural community, building upon the previously established telemedicine for reach, education, access, and treatment (TREAT model. Patients in this feasibility study demonstrated improvement in hemoglobin A1c values, and reported better understanding of diabetes. Providers reported the SDM aids increased cohesion among team members (including patients and facilitated patient education and behavioral goal setting. This project demonstrated that SDM could be integrated into the workflow of a telemedicine team visit with good provider and patient satisfaction.

Manufactured but not imported: new directions for research in shared decision making support and skills.

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Edwards, A.; Evans, R.W.; Elwyn, G.

2003-01-01

Significant conceptual work on shared decision making has taken place but there are still significant challenges in achieving it in routine clinical practice. This paper outlines what research has identified to date that may promote shared decision making, and the further research that is required

Shared Decision Making in ICUs: An American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society Policy Statement.

Science.gov (United States)

Kon, Alexander A; Davidson, Judy E; Morrison, Wynne; Danis, Marion; White, Douglas B

2016-01-01

Shared decision making is endorsed by critical care organizations; however, there remains confusion about what shared decision making is, when it should be used, and approaches to promote partnerships in treatment decisions. The purpose of this statement is to define shared decision making, recommend when shared decision making should be used, identify the range of ethically acceptable decision-making models, and present important communication skills. The American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society Ethics Committees reviewed empirical research and normative analyses published in peer-reviewed journals to generate recommendations. Recommendations approved by consensus of the full Ethics Committees of American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society were included in the statement. Six recommendations were endorsed: 1) DEFINITION: Shared decision making is a collaborative process that allows patients, or their surrogates, and clinicians to make healthcare decisions together, taking into account the best scientific evidence available, as well as the patient's values, goals, and preferences. 2) Clinicians should engage in a shared decision making process to define overall goals of care (including decisions regarding limiting or withdrawing life-prolonging interventions) and when making major treatment decisions that may be affected by personal values, goals, and preferences. 3) Clinicians should use as their "default" approach a shared decision making process that includes three main elements: information exchange, deliberation, and making a treatment decision. 4) A wide range of decision-making approaches are ethically supportable, including patient- or surrogate-directed and clinician-directed models. Clinicians should tailor the decision-making process based on the preferences of the patient or surrogate. 5) Clinicians should be trained in communication skills. 6) Research is needed to evaluate decision

Consumer Satisfaction with Psychiatric Services: The Role of Shared Decision-Making and the Therapeutic Relationship

Science.gov (United States)

Klingaman, Elizabeth A.; Medoff, Deborah R.; Park, Stephanie G.; Brown, Clayton H.; Fang, Lijuan; Dixon, Lisa B.; Hack, Samantha M.; Tapscott, Stephanie L.; Walsh, Mary Brighid; Kreyenbuhl, Julie A.

2017-01-01

Objective Although dissatisfaction is a primary reason for disengagement from outpatient psychiatric care among consumers with serious mental illnesses, little is known about predictors of their satisfaction with medication management visits. The primary purpose of the present study was to explore how dimensions of consumer preferences for shared decision-making (i.e., preferences for obtaining knowledge about one’s mental illness, being offered and asked one’s opinion about treatment options, and involvement in treatment decisions) and the therapeutic relationship (i.e., positive collaboration and type of clinician input) were related to visit satisfaction. Methods Participants were 228 Veterans with serious mental illnesses who completed a 19-item self-report questionnaire assessing satisfaction with visits to prescribers (n=524 assessments) immediately after visits. In this correlational design, a 3-level mixed model with the restricted maximum likelihood estimation procedure was used to examine shared decision-making preferences and therapeutic alliance as predictors of visit satisfaction. Results Preferences for involvement in treatment decisions was the unique component of shared decision-making associated with satisfaction, such that the more consumers desired involvement, the less satisfied they were. Positive collaboration and prescriber input were associated with greater visit satisfaction. Conclusions and Implications for Practice When consumers with serious mental illnesses express preferences to be involved in shared decision-making, it may not be sufficient to only provide information and treatment options; prescribers should attend to consumers’ interest in involvement in actual treatment decisions. Assessment and tailoring of treatment approaches to consumer preferences for shared decision-making should occur within the context of a strong therapeutic relationship. PMID:25664755

Do continuing medical education articles foster shared decision making?

Science.gov (United States)

Labrecque, Michel; Lafortune, Valérie; Lajeunesse, Judith; Lambert-Perrault, Anne-Marie; Manrique, Hermes; Blais, Johanne; Légaré, France

2010-01-01

Defined as reviews of clinical aspects of a specific health problem published in peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed medical journals, offered without charge, continuing medical education (CME) articles form a key strategy for translating knowledge into practice. This study assessed CME articles for mention of evidence-based information on benefits and harms of available treatment and/or preventive options that are deemed essential for shared decision making (SDM) to occur in clinical practice. Articles were selected from 5 medical journals that publish CME articles and are provided free of charge to primary-care physicians of the Province of Quebec, Canada. Two individuals independently scored each article with the use of a 10-item checklist based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. In case of discrepancy, the item score was established by team consensus. Scores were added to produce a total article score ranging from 0 (no item present) to 10 (all items present). Thirty articles (6 articles per journal) were selected. Total article scores ranged from 1 to 9, with a mean (+/- SD) of 3.1 +/- 2.0 (95% confidence interval 2.8-4.3). Health conditions and treatment options were the items most frequently discussed in the articles; next came treatment benefits. Possible harms, the use of the same denominators for benefits and harms, and methods to facilitate the communication of benefits and harms to patients were almost never described. No significant differences between journals were observed. The CME articles evaluated did not include the evidence-based information necessary to foster SDM in clinical practice. Peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed medical journals should require CME articles to include this type of information.

Shared Decision-Making for Cancer Care Among Racial and Ethnic Minorities: A Systematic Review

Science.gov (United States)

Mead, Erin L.; Doorenbos, Ardith Z.; Javid, Sara H.; Haozous, Emily A.; Alvord, Lori Arviso; Flum, David R.

2013-01-01

To assess decision-making for cancer treatment among racial/ethnic minority patients, we systematically reviewed and synthesized evidence from studies of “shared decision-making,” “cancer,” and “minority groups,” using PubMed, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and EMBASE. We identified significant themes that we compared across studies, refined, and organized into a conceptual model. Five major themes emerged: treatment decision-making, patient factors, family and important others, community, and provider factors. Thematic data overlapped categories, indicating that individuals’ preferences for medical decision-making cannot be authentically examined outside the context of family and community. The shared decision-making model should be expanded beyond the traditional patient–physician dyad to include other important stakeholders in the cancer treatment decision process, such as family or community leaders. PMID:24134353

The context influences doctors' support of shared decision-making in cancer care

OpenAIRE

Shepherd, H L; Tattersall, M H N; Butow, P N

2007-01-01

Most cancer patients in westernised countries now want all information about their situation, good or bad, and many wish to be involved in decision-making. The attitudes to and use of shared decision-making (SDM) by cancer doctors is not well known. Australian cancer clinicians treating breast, colorectal, gynaecological, haematological, or urological cancer were surveyed to identify their usual approach to decision-making and their comfort with different decision-making styles when discussin...

Improving access to shared decision-making for Hispanics/Latinos with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Davidson JA

2015-04-01

-quality, well-developed tools to facilitate shared decision-making in populations with limited access to culturally sensitive information can narrow gaps and align care with individual patient preferences. A newly developed PDA is available for shared decision-making that provides culturally appropriate treatment information for inadequately controlled Hispanics/Latinos with T2DM. The impact on the overall health of patients and care management of T2DM requires further study.Keywords: patient decision aid, language adaptation, Hispanic, decision making, type 2 diabetes

The state of shared decision making in Malaysia.

Science.gov (United States)

Lee, Yew Kong; Ng, Chirk Jenn

2017-06-01

Shared decision making (SDM) activities in Malaysia began around 2010. Although the concept is not widespread, there are opportunities to implement SDM in both the public and private healthcare sectors. Malaysia has a multicultural society and cultural components (such as language differences, medical paternalism, strong family involvement, religious beliefs and complementary medicine) influence medical decision making. In terms of policy, the Ministry of Health has increasingly mentioned patient-centered care as a component of healthcare delivery while the Malaysian Medical Council's guidelines on doctors' duties mentioned collaborative partnerships as a goal of doctor-patient relationships. Current research on SDM comprises baseline surveys of decisional role preferences, development and implementation of locally developed patient decision aids, and conducting of SDM training workshops. Most of this research is carried out by public research universities. In summary, the current state of SDM in Malaysia is still at its infancy. However, there are increasing recognition and efforts from the academic institutions and Ministry of Health to conduct research in SDM, develop patient decision support tools and initiate national discussion on patient involvement in decision making. Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

Computerized Decision Aids for Shared Decision Making in Serious Illness: Systematic Review.

Science.gov (United States)

Staszewska, Anna; Zaki, Pearl; Lee, Joon

2017-10-06

Shared decision making (SDM) is important in achieving patient-centered care. SDM tools such as decision aids are intended to inform the patient. When used to assist in decision making between treatments, decision aids have been shown to reduce decisional conflict, increase ease of decision making, and increase modification of previous decisions. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the impact of computerized decision aids on patient-centered outcomes related to SDM for seriously ill patients. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the impact of computerized decision aids on patient-centered outcomes and SDM in serious illness. Six RCTs were identified and data were extracted on study population, design, and results. Risk of bias was assessed by a modified Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Quality Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials. Six RCTs tested decision tools in varying serious illnesses. Three studies compared different computerized decision aids against each other and a control. All but one study demonstrated improvement in at least one patient-centered outcome. Computerized decision tools may reduce unnecessary treatment in patients with low disease severity in comparison with informational pamphlets. Additionally, electronic health record (EHR) portals may provide the opportunity to manage care from the home for individuals affected by illness. The quality of decision aids is of great importance. Furthermore, satisfaction with the use of tools is associated with increased patient satisfaction and reduced decisional conflict. Finally, patients may benefit from computerized decision tools without the need for increased physician involvement. Most computerized decision aids improved at least one patient-centered outcome. All RCTs identified were at a High Risk of Bias or Unclear Risk of Bias. Effort should be made to improve the quality of RCTs testing SDM aids in serious

Shared Decision Making in Education Governance Using Business Portals

Science.gov (United States)

Peoples, Adrian L.

2009-01-01

The purpose of this study was to address a high-volume problem for the Delaware Department of Education Office of Professional Accountability (OPA). This problem was addressed by sharing the certification decision with qualified personnel located at each of the four teacher preparation programs located in Delaware at Delaware State University…

Toward shared decision making: using the OPTION scale to analyze resident-patient consultations in family medicine

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Pellerin, M.A.; Elwyn, G.; Rousseau, M.; Stacey, D.; Robitaille, H.; Legare, F.

2011-01-01

PURPOSE: Do residents in family medicine practice share decision making with patients during consultations? This study used a validated scale to score family medicine residents' shared decision-making (SDM) skills in primary care consultations and to determine whether residents' demographic

Effective follow-up consultations: the importance of patient-centered communication and shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Brand, Paul L P; Stiggelbout, Anne M

2013-12-01

Paediatricians spend a considerable proportion of their time performing follow-up visits for children with chronic conditions, but they rarely receive specific training on how best to perform such consultations. The traditional method of running a follow-up consultation is based on the doctor's agenda, and is problem-oriented. Patients and parents, however, prefer a patient-centered, and solution-focused approach. Although many physicians now recognize the importance of addressing the patient's perspective in a follow-up consultation, a number of barriers hamper its implementation in practice, including time constraints, lack of appropriate training, and a strong tradition of the biomedical, doctor-centered approach. Addressing the patient's perspective successfully can be achieved through shared decision making, clinicians and patients making decisions together based on the best clinical evidence. Research shows that shared decision making not only increases patient, parent, and physician satisfaction with the consultation, but also may improve health outcomes. Shared decision making involves building a physician-patient-parent partnership, agreeing on the problem at hand, laying out the available options with their benefits and risks, eliciting the patient's views and preferences on these options, and agreeing on a course of action. Shared decision making requires specific communication skills, which can be learned, and should be mastered through deliberate practice. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

A web-based tool to support shared decision making for people with a psychotic disorder: randomized controlled trial and process evaluation.

Science.gov (United States)

van der Krieke, Lian; Emerencia, Ando C; Boonstra, Nynke; Wunderink, Lex; de Jonge, Peter; Sytema, Sjoerd

2013-10-07

Mental health policy makers encourage the development of electronic decision aids to increase patient participation in medical decision making. Evidence is needed to determine whether these decision aids are helpful in clinical practice and whether they lead to increased patient involvement and better outcomes. This study reports the outcome of a randomized controlled trial and process evaluation of a Web-based intervention to facilitate shared decision making for people with psychotic disorders. The study was carried out in a Dutch mental health institution. Patients were recruited from 2 outpatient teams for patients with psychosis (N=250). Patients in the intervention condition (n=124) were provided an account to access a Web-based information and decision tool aimed to support patients in acquiring an overview of their needs and appropriate treatment options provided by their mental health care organization. Patients were given the opportunity to use the Web-based tool either on their own (at their home computer or at a computer of the service) or with the support of an assistant. Patients in the control group received care as usual (n=126). Half of the patients in the sample were patients experiencing a first episode of psychosis; the other half were patients with a chronic psychosis. Primary outcome was patient-perceived involvement in medical decision making, measured with the Combined Outcome Measure for Risk Communication and Treatment Decision-making Effectiveness (COMRADE). Process evaluation consisted of questionnaire-based surveys, open interviews, and researcher observation. In all, 73 patients completed the follow-up measurement and were included in the final analysis (response rate 29.2%). More than one-third (48/124, 38.7%) of the patients who were provided access to the Web-based decision aid used it, and most used its full functionality. No differences were found between the intervention and control conditions on perceived involvement in medical

Temporal characteristics of decisions in hospital encounters: a threshold for shared decision making? A qualitative study.

Science.gov (United States)

Ofstad, Eirik H; Frich, Jan C; Schei, Edvin; Frankel, Richard M; Gulbrandsen, Pål

2014-11-01

To identify and characterize physicians' statements that contained evidence of clinically relevant decisions in encounters with patients in different hospital settings. Qualitative analysis of 50 videotaped encounters from wards, the emergency room (ER) and outpatient clinics in a department of internal medicine at a Norwegian university hospital. Clinical decisions could be grouped in a temporal order: decisions which had already been made, and were brought into the encounter by the physician (preformed decisions), decisions made in the present (here-and-now decisions), and decisions prescribing future actions given a certain course of events (conditional decisions). Preformed decisions were a hallmark in the ward and conditional decisions a main feature of ER encounters. Clinical decisions related to a patient-physician encounter spanned a time frame exceeding the duration of the encounter. While a distribution of decisions over time and space fosters sharing and dilution of responsibility between providers, it makes the decision making process hard to access for patients. In order to plan when and how to involve patients in decisions, physicians need increased awareness of when clinical decisions are made, who usually makes them, and who should make them. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Shared Decision Making in women testing for a BRCA 1/2 mutation.

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Roosmalen, M.S van

2005-01-01

Women with a BRCA1/2 mutation have a high genetic risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. They face the difficult choice between screening and prophylactic surgery for the breasts and ovaries. We have developed a shared decision making program to prepare these women for decision making. The

Acceptance of shared decision making with reference to an electronic library of decision aids (arriba-lib) and its association to decision making in patients: an evaluation study.

Science.gov (United States)

Hirsch, Oliver; Keller, Heidemarie; Krones, Tanja; Donner-Banzhoff, Norbert

2011-07-07

Decision aids based on the philosophy of shared decision making are designed to help patients make informed choices among diagnostic or treatment options by delivering evidence-based information on options and outcomes. A patient decision aid can be regarded as a complex intervention because it consists of several presumably relevant components. Decision aids have rarely been field tested to assess patients' and physicians' attitudes towards them. It is also unclear what effect decision aids have on the adherence to chosen options. The electronic library of decision aids (arriba-lib) to be used within the clinical encounter has a modular structure and contains evidence-based decision aids for the following topics: cardiovascular prevention, atrial fibrillation, coronary heart disease, oral antidiabetics, conventional and intensified insulin therapy, and unipolar depression. We conducted an evaluation study in which 29 primary care physicians included 192 patients. After the consultation, patients filled in questionnaires and were interviewed via telephone two months later. We used generalised estimation equations to measure associations within patient variables and traditional crosstab analyses. Patients were highly satisfied with arriba-lib and the process of shared decision making. Two-thirds of patients reached in the telephone interview wanted to be counselled again with arriba-lib. There was a high congruence between preferred and perceived decision making. Of those patients reached in the telephone interview, 80.7% said that they implemented the decision, independent of gender and education. Elderly patients were more likely to say that they implemented the decision. Shared decision making with our multi-modular electronic library of decision aids (arriba-lib) was accepted by a high number of patients. It has positive associations to general aspects of decision making in patients. It can be used for patient groups with a wide range of individual

Challenges in shared decision making in advanced cancer care: a qualitative longitudinal observational and interview study.

Science.gov (United States)

Brom, Linda; De Snoo-Trimp, Janine C; Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Bregje D; Widdershoven, Guy A M; Stiggelbout, Anne M; Pasman, H Roeline W

2017-02-01

Patients' preferences and expectations should be taken into account in treatment decision making in the last phase of life. Shared decision making (SDM) is regarded as a way to give the patient a central role in decision making. Little is known about how SDM is used in clinical practice in advanced cancer care. To examine whether and how the steps of SDM can be recognized in decision making about second- and third-line chemotherapy. Fourteen advanced cancer patients were followed over time using face-to-face in-depth interviews and observations of the patients' out-clinic visits. Interviews and outpatient clinic visits in which treatment options were discussed or decisions made were transcribed verbatim and analysed using open coding. Patients were satisfied with the decision-making process, but the steps of SDM were barely seen in daily practice. The creation of awareness about available treatment options by physicians was limited and not discussed in an equal way. Patients' wishes and concerns were not explicitly assessed, which led to different expectations about improved survival from subsequent lines of chemotherapy. To reach SDM in daily practice, physicians should create awareness of all treatment options, including forgoing treatment, and communicate the risk of benefit and harm. Open and honest communication is needed in which patients' expectations and concerns are discussed. Through this, the difficult process of decision making in the last phase of life can be facilitated and the focus on the best care for the specific patient is strengthened. © 2015 The Authors. Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Externalising the autobiographical self: sharing personal memories online facilitated memory retention.

Science.gov (United States)

Wang, Qi; Lee, Dasom; Hou, Yubo

2017-07-01

Internet technology provides a new means of recalling and sharing personal memories in the digital age. What is the mnemonic consequence of posting personal memories online? Theories of transactive memory and autobiographical memory would make contrasting predictions. In the present study, college students completed a daily diary for a week, listing at the end of each day all the events that happened to them on that day. They also reported whether they posted any of the events online. Participants received a surprise memory test after the completion of the diary recording and then another test a week later. At both tests, events posted online were significantly more likely than those not posted online to be recalled. It appears that sharing memories online may provide unique opportunities for rehearsal and meaning-making that facilitate memory retention.

Prior expectations facilitate metacognition for perceptual decision.

Science.gov (United States)

Sherman, M T; Seth, A K; Barrett, A B; Kanai, R

2015-09-01

The influential framework of 'predictive processing' suggests that prior probabilistic expectations influence, or even constitute, perceptual contents. This notion is evidenced by the facilitation of low-level perceptual processing by expectations. However, whether expectations can facilitate high-level components of perception remains unclear. We addressed this question by considering the influence of expectations on perceptual metacognition. To isolate the effects of expectation from those of attention we used a novel factorial design: expectation was manipulated by changing the probability that a Gabor target would be presented; attention was manipulated by instructing participants to perform or ignore a concurrent visual search task. We found that, independently of attention, metacognition improved when yes/no responses were congruent with expectations of target presence/absence. Results were modeled under a novel Bayesian signal detection theoretic framework which integrates bottom-up signal propagation with top-down influences, to provide a unified description of the mechanisms underlying perceptual decision and metacognition. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Lessons in Integrating Shared Decision-Making Into Cancer Care

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Steffensen, Karina Dahl; Vinter, Mette; Crüger, Dorthe

2018-01-01

The benefits of shared decision-making (SDM) in health care delivery are well documented, but implementing SDM at the institutional level is challenging, particularly when patients have complex illnesses and care needs, as in cancer. Denmark's Lillebaelt Hospital, in creating The Patient's Cancer...... championed. It organized multiple demonstration projects focused on use of decision aids, patient-reported outcome measures, and better communication tools and practices. It designed programs to train clinicians in the art of doctor-patient communication. It used research evidence to inform development...... of the decision aids that its clinicians use with their patients. And it rigorously measured SDM performance in an ongoing fashion so that progress could be tracked and refined to ensure continuous improvement. Initial data on the institution's SDM initiatives from the Danish national annual survey of patients...

Race, ethnicity, and shared decision making for hyperlipidemia and hypertension treatment: the DECISIONS survey.

Science.gov (United States)

Ratanawongsa, Neda; Zikmund-Fisher, Brian J; Couper, Mick P; Van Hoewyk, John; Powe, Neil R

2010-01-01

Racial/ethnic differences in shared decision making about cardiovascular risk-reduction therapy could affect health disparities. To investigate whether patient race/ethnicity is associated with experiences discussing cardiovascular risk-reduction therapy with health care providers. National sample of US adults identified by random-digit dialing. Cross-sectional survey conducted in November 2006 to May 2007. Among participants in the National Survey of Medical Decisions (DECISIONS), a nationally representative sample of English-speaking US adults aged 40 and older, the authors analyzed respondents who reported discussing hyperlipidemia or hypertension medications with a health care provider in the previous 2 years. In multivariate linear and logistic regressions adjusting for age, gender, income, insurance status, perceived health, and current therapy, they assessed the relation between race/ethnicity (black/Hispanic v. white) and decision making: knowledge, discussion of pros and cons of therapy, discussion of patient preference, who made the final decision, preferred involvement, and confidence in the decision. Of respondents who discussed high cholesterol (N = 738) or hypertension (N = 745) medications, 88% were white, 9% black, and 4% Hispanic. Minorities had lower knowledge scores than whites for hyperlipidemia (42% v. 52%, difference -10% [95% confidence interval (CI): 15, -5], P decision-making process.

The effect of simulated narratives that leverage EMR data on shared decision-making: a pilot study.

Science.gov (United States)

Zeng-Treitler, Qing; Gibson, Bryan; Hill, Brent; Butler, Jorie; Christensen, Carrie; Redd, Douglas; Shao, Yijun; Bray, Bruce

2016-07-22

Shared decision-making can improve patient satisfaction and outcomes. To participate in shared decision-making, patients need information about the potential risks and benefits of treatment options. Our team has developed a novel prototype tool for shared decision-making called hearts like mine (HLM) that leverages EHR data to provide personalized information to patients regarding potential outcomes of different treatments. These potential outcomes are presented through an Icon array and/or simulated narratives for each "person" in the display. In this pilot project we sought to determine whether the inclusion of simulated narratives in the display affects individuals' decision-making. Thirty subjects participated in this block-randomized study in which they used a version of HLM with simulated narratives and a version without (or in the opposite order) to make a hypothetical therapeutic decision. After each decision, participants completed a questionnaire that measured decisional confidence. We used Chi square tests to compare decisions across conditions and Mann-Whitney U tests to examine the effects of narratives on decisional confidence. Finally, we calculated the mean of subjects' post-experiment rating of whether narratives were helpful in their decision-making. In this study, there was no effect of simulated narratives on treatment decisions (decision 1: Chi squared = 0, p = 1.0; decision 2: Chi squared = 0.574, p = 0.44) or Decisional confidence (decision 1, w = 105.5, p = 0.78; decision 2, w = 86.5, p = 0.28). Post-experiment, participants reported that narratives helped them to make decisions (mean = 3.3/4). We found that simulated narratives had no measurable effect on decisional confidence or decisions and most participants felt that the narratives were helpful to them in making therapeutic decisions. The use of simulated stories holds promise for promoting shared decision-making while minimizing their potential biasing effect.

Manufactured but not imported: new directions for research in shared decision making support and skills.

Science.gov (United States)

Edwards, Adrian; Evans, Rhodri; Elwyn, Glyn

2003-05-01

Significant conceptual work on shared decision making has taken place but there are still significant challenges in achieving it in routine clinical practice. This paper outlines what research has identified to date that may promote shared decision making, and the further research that is required to enable continuing progress. Greater understanding of the models of decision making and instruments to identify them in practice are still required. Specifying consumer competences, developing instruments to assess these and interventions to enhance them may also be important. Clarifying all these aspects may enable those charged with training professionals to improve the content of professional development programmes. This may be particularly important in the field of cancer treatments where the stakes are high-patients usually desire much information but their desire for involvement in decision making is more variable. The consequences of getting this balance right or wrong are significant with much to be gained or lost. Continued development and evaluation of decision aids and decision explorers that use interactive technology will also be important in identifying how to progress with consumer involvement. If we can learn these lessons, then wider implementation of shared decision making or consumer involvement may become a nearer prospect.

Sharing clinical decisions for multimorbidity case management using social network and open-source tools.

Science.gov (United States)

Martínez-García, Alicia; Moreno-Conde, Alberto; Jódar-Sánchez, Francisco; Leal, Sandra; Parra, Carlos

2013-12-01

Social networks applied through Web 2.0 tools have gained importance in health domain, because they produce improvements on the communication and coordination capabilities among health professionals. This is highly relevant for multimorbidity patients care because there is a large number of health professionals in charge of patient care, and this requires to obtain clinical consensus in their decisions. Our objective is to develop a tool for collaborative work among health professionals for multimorbidity patient care. We describe the architecture to incorporate decision support functionalities in a social network tool to enable the adoption of shared decisions among health professionals from different care levels. As part of the first stage of the project, this paper describes the results obtained in a pilot study about acceptance and use of the social network component in our healthcare setting. At Virgen del Rocío University Hospital we have designed and developed the Shared Care Platform (SCP) to provide support in the continuity of care for multimorbidity patients. The SCP has two consecutively developed components: social network component, called Clinical Wall, and Clinical Decision Support (CDS) system. The Clinical Wall contains a record where health professionals are able to debate and define shared decisions. We conducted a pilot study to assess the use and acceptance of the SCP by healthcare professionals through questionnaire based on the theory of the Technology Acceptance Model. In March 2012 we released and deployed the SCP, but only with the social network component. The pilot project lasted 6 months in the hospital and 2 primary care centers. From March to September 2012 we created 16 records in the Clinical Wall, all with a high priority. A total of 10 professionals took part in the exchange of messages: 3 internists and 7 general practitioners generated 33 messages. 12 of the 16 record (75%) were answered by the destination health professionals

Interventions for promoting participation in shared decision-making for children with cancer.

LENUS (Irish Health Repository)

Coyne, Imelda

2013-01-01

Children\\'s rights to have their views heard in matters that affect their lives are now well established since the publication of the UN Convention treaty (1989). Children with cancer generally prefer to be involved in decision-making and consider it important that they have the opportunity to take part in decision-making concerning their health care, even in end-of-life decisions. There is considerable support for involving children in healthcare decision-making at a level commensurate with their experience, age and abilities. Thus healthcare professionals and parents need to know how they should involve children in decision-making and what interventions are most effective in promoting shared decision-making (SDM) for children with cancer.

Barriers and opportunities for shared decision making in clinical practice

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Schuitmaker-Warnaar, T.J.; Scheele, Fedde

2017-01-01

Shared decision-making (SDM) is promoted as tool for improving quality and responsiveness of care, while lowering overall costs. The underlying idea of SDM is well-conceptualised and a wide range of experiments in the Netherlands and abroad have been executed over the last couple of years. However,

Key principles for a national clinical decision support knowledge sharing framework: synthesis of insights from leading subject matter experts.

Science.gov (United States)

Kawamoto, Kensaku; Hongsermeier, Tonya; Wright, Adam; Lewis, Janet; Bell, Douglas S; Middleton, Blackford

2013-01-01

To identify key principles for establishing a national clinical decision support (CDS) knowledge sharing framework. As part of an initiative by the US Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT (ONC) to establish a framework for national CDS knowledge sharing, key stakeholders were identified. Stakeholders' viewpoints were obtained through surveys and in-depth interviews, and findings and relevant insights were summarized. Based on these insights, key principles were formulated for establishing a national CDS knowledge sharing framework. Nineteen key stakeholders were recruited, including six executives from electronic health record system vendors, seven executives from knowledge content producers, three executives from healthcare provider organizations, and three additional experts in clinical informatics. Based on these stakeholders' insights, five key principles were identified for effectively sharing CDS knowledge nationally. These principles are (1) prioritize and support the creation and maintenance of a national CDS knowledge sharing framework; (2) facilitate the development of high-value content and tooling, preferably in an open-source manner; (3) accelerate the development or licensing of required, pragmatic standards; (4) acknowledge and address medicolegal liability concerns; and (5) establish a self-sustaining business model. Based on the principles identified, a roadmap for national CDS knowledge sharing was developed through the ONC's Advancing CDS initiative. The study findings may serve as a useful guide for ongoing activities by the ONC and others to establish a national framework for sharing CDS knowledge and improving clinical care.

Decision-making on shared sanitation in the informal settlements of Kisumu, Kenya.

Science.gov (United States)

Simiyu, Sheillah; Swilling, Mark; Cairncross, Sandy

2017-10-01

Unlike most quantitative studies that investigate decision-making on investing in sanitation, this study adopted a qualitative approach to investigate decision-making on shared sanitation in the informal settlements of Kisumu city, in Kenya. Using a grounded theory approach, landlords and tenants were interviewed to identify sanitation decisions, individuals involved in decision-making and factors influencing decision-making. The results indicate that the main sanitation decisions are on investment, emptying, repair and cleaning. Landlords make investment, emptying and repair decisions, while tenants make cleaning decisions. Absentee landlords are less involved in most decision-making compared to live-in landlords, who rarely consult tenants in decision-making. Tenants make decisions after consultations with a third party and often collectively with other tenants. Sanitation interventions in informal settlements should thus, target landlords and tenants, with investment efforts being directed at landlords and maintenance efforts at tenants.

Shared decision making observed in clinical practice: visual displays of communication sequence and patterns.

Science.gov (United States)

Elwyn, G; Edwards, A; Wensing, M; Hibbs, R; Wilkinson, C; Grol, R

2001-05-01

The aim of the study was to examine the communication strategies of general practitioners attempting to involve patients in treatment or management decisions. This empirical data was then compared with theoretical 'competences' derived for 'shared decision making'. The subjects were four general practitioners, who taped conducted consultations with the specific intent of involving patients in the decision-making process. The consultations were transcribed, coded into skill categorizations and presented as visual display using a specifically devised sequential banding The empirical data from these purposively selected consultation from clinicians who are experienced in shared decision making did not match suggested theoretical frameworks. The views of patients about treatment possibilities and their preferred role in decision making were not explored. The interactions were initiated by a problem-defining phase, statements of 'equipoise' consistently appeared and the portrayal of option information was often intermingled with opportunities to allow patients to question and reflect. A decision-making stage occurred consistently after approximately 80% of the total consultation duration and arrangements were consistently made for follow-up and review. Eight of the 10 consultations took more than 11 min - these specific consultations were characterized by significant proportions of time provided for information exchange and patient interaction. The results demonstrate that some theoretical competences are not distinguishable in practice and other stages, not previously described, such as the 'portrayal of equipoise', are observed. The suggested ideal of a shared decision-making interaction will either require more time than currently allocated, or alternative strategies to enable information exchange outside the consultation.

[Shared decision-making as a new quality indicator in nephrology: a nationwide survey in Germany].

Science.gov (United States)

Scheibler, Fülöp; Stoffel, Markus P; Barth, Claudia; Kuch, Christine; Steffen, Petra; Baldamus, Conrad A; Pfaff, Holger

2005-04-15

Shared decision-making (SDM) as a model in physician-patient interaction is gaining relevance in the German health system. By applying this model, mid- and long-term improvements are expected especially in the outcomes of chronic diseases. Up to now, there has hardly been any empirical data available in German health services research regarding the state and development of SDM. This study establishes a baseline and provides actual data on this subject based on a German-wide survey of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Standardized German-wide survey of 6,614 patients with ESRD. The questionnaire included an instrument to measure the patients' perceived involvement in care (PICS) which had been translated and validated before. 82% of the questioned patients feel their physicians facilitated involvement in decision making. 81% of the patients actively inform themselves concerning their disease and treatment options. 69% state that SDM has taken place. Age, years on dialysis and gender correlate with perceived involvement. This paper provides a valid baseline for the prospective research of SDM in ESRD. The results indicate that dialysis patients are willing to participate in the process of medical decision-making. Characteristics and preferences of the patients should be taken into account not only in everyday clinical interactions. They could be monitored systematically within the framework of quality management and used as potential for quality improvement.

Engaging patients in health care decisions in the emergency department through shared decision-making: a systematic review.

Science.gov (United States)

Flynn, Darren; Knoedler, Meghan A; Hess, Erik P; Murad, M Hassan; Erwin, Patricia J; Montori, Victor M; Thomson, Richard G

2012-08-01

Many decisions in the emergency department (ED) may benefit from patient involvement, even though this setting has been considered least conducive to shared decision-making (SDM). The objective was to conduct a systematic review to evaluate the approaches, methods, and tools used to engage patients or their surrogates in SDM in the ED. Five electronic databases were searched in conjunction with contacting content experts, reviewing selected bibliographies, and conducting citation searches using the Web of Knowledge database. Two reviewers independently selected eligible studies that addressed patient involvement and engagement in decision-making in the ED setting via the use of decision support interventions (DSIs), defined as decision aids or decision support designed to communicate probabilistic information on the risks and benefits of treatment options to patients as part of an SDM process. Eligible studies described and assessed at least one of the following outcomes: patient knowledge, experiences and perspectives on participating in treatment or management decisions, clinician or patient satisfaction, preference for involvement and/or degree of engagement in decision-making and treatment preferences, and clinical outcomes (e.g., rates of hospital admission/readmission, rates of medical or surgical interventions). Two reviewers extracted data on study characteristics, methodologic quality, and outcomes. The authors also assessed the extent to which SDM interventions adhered to good practice for the presentation of information on outcome probabilities (eight probability items from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Instrument [IPDASi]) and had comprehensive development processes. Five studies met inclusion criteria and were synthesized using a narrative approach. Each study was of satisfactory methodologic quality and used a DSI to engage patients or their surrogates in decision-making in the ED across four domains: 1) management options for

Development of a Draft Core Set of Domains for Measuring Shared Decision Making in Osteoarthritis

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Toupin-April, Karine; Barton, Jennifer; Fraenkel, Liana

2015-01-01

OBJECTIVE: Despite the importance of shared decision making for delivering patient-centered care in rheumatology, there is no consensus on how to measure its process and outcomes. The aim of this Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) working group is to determine the core set of domains...... for measuring shared decision making in intervention studies in adults with osteoarthritis (OA), from the perspectives of patients, health professionals, and researchers. METHODS: We followed the OMERACT Filter 2.0 method to develop a draft core domain set by (1) forming an OMERACT working group; (2) conducting...... a review of domains of shared decision making; and (3) obtaining opinions of all those involved using a modified nominal group process held at a session activity at the OMERACT 12 meeting. RESULTS: In all, 26 people from Europe, North America, and Australia, including 5 patient research partners...

The application of reduced-processing decision support systems to facilitate the acquisition of decision-making skills.

Science.gov (United States)

Perry, Nathan C; Wiggins, Mark W; Childs, Merilyn; Fogarty, Gerard

2013-06-01

The study was designed to examine whether the availability of reduced-processing decision support system interfaces could improve the decision making of inexperienced personnel in the context of Although research into reduced-processing decision support systems has demonstrated benefits in minimizing cognitive load, these benefits have not typically translated into direct improvements in decision accuracy because of the tendency for inexperienced personnel to focus on less-critical information. The authors investigated whether reduced-processing interfaces that direct users' attention toward the most critical cues for decision making can produce improvements in decision-making performance. Novice participants made incident command-related decisions in experimental conditions that differed according to the amount of information that was available within the interface, the level of control that they could exert over the presentation of information, and whether they had received decision training. The results revealed that despite receiving training, participants improved in decision accuracy only when they were provided with an interface that restricted information access to the most critical cues. It was concluded that an interface that restricts information access to only the most critical cues in the scenario can facilitate improvements in decision performance. Decision support system interfaces that encourage the processing of the most critical cues have the potential to improve the accuracy and timeliness of decisions made by inexperienced personnel.

A critical narrative analysis of shared decision-making in acute inpatient mental health care.

Science.gov (United States)

Stacey, Gemma; Felton, Anne; Morgan, Alastair; Stickley, Theo; Willis, Martin; Diamond, Bob; Houghton, Philip; Johnson, Beverley; Dumenya, John

2016-01-01

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a high priority in healthcare policy and is complementary to the recovery philosophy in mental health care. This agenda has been operationalised within the Values-Based Practice (VBP) framework, which offers a theoretical and practical model to promote democratic interprofessional approaches to decision-making. However, these are limited by a lack of recognition of the implications of power implicit within the mental health system. This study considers issues of power within the context of decision-making and examines to what extent decisions about patients' care on acute in-patient wards are perceived to be shared. Focus groups were conducted with 46 mental health professionals, service users, and carers. The data were analysed using the framework of critical narrative analysis (CNA). The findings of the study suggested each group constructed different identity positions, which placed them as inside or outside of the decision-making process. This reflected their view of themselves as best placed to influence a decision on behalf of the service user. In conclusion, the discourse of VBP and SDM needs to take account of how differentials of power and the positioning of speakers affect the context in which decisions take place.

Development and Evaluation of Computer-Based Versions of the Decision Board for Early Breast Cancer

National Research Council Canada - National Science Library

Whelan, Timothy J

2004-01-01

.... Randomized trials have demonstrated that the Decision Board not only increases patient knowledge, but improves patient satisfaction, decreases decisional conflict, and facilitates shared decision...

Physicians Perceptions of Shared Decision-Making in Neonatal and Pediatric Critical Care.

Science.gov (United States)

Richards, Claire A; Starks, Helene; O'Connor, M Rebecca; Bourget, Erica; Hays, Ross M; Doorenbos, Ardith Z

2018-04-01

Most children die in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units after decisions are made to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatments. These decisions can be challenging when there are different views about the child's best interest and when there is a lack of clarity about how best to also consider the interests of the family. To understand how neonatal and pediatric critical care physicians balance and integrate the interests of the child and family in decisions about life-sustaining treatments. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 22 physicians from neonatal, pediatric, and cardiothoracic intensive care units in a single quaternary care pediatric hospital. Transcribed interviews were analyzed using content and thematic analysis. We identified 3 main themes: (1) beliefs about child and family interests; (2) disagreement about the child's best interest; and (3) decision-making strategies, including limiting options, being directive, staying neutral, and allowing parents to come to their own conclusions. Physicians described challenges to implementing shared decision-making including unequal power and authority, clinical uncertainty, and complexity of balancing child and family interests. They acknowledged determining the level of engagement in shared decision-making with parents (vs routine engagement) based on their perceptions of the best interests of the child and parent. Due to power imbalances, families' values and preferences may not be integrated in decisions or families may be excluded from discussions about goals of care. We suggest that a systematic approach to identify parental preferences and needs for decisional roles and information may reduce variability in parental involvement.

Using Option Grids: steps toward shared decision-making for neonatal circumcision

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Fay, M.; Grande, S.W.; Donnelly, K.; Elwyn, G.

2016-01-01

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact, acceptability and feasibility of a short encounter tool designed to enhance the process of shared decision-making and parental engagement. METHODS: We analyzed video-recordings of clinical encounters, half undertaken before and half after a brief intervention that

Shared decision-making for prostate cancer screening and treatment: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

Science.gov (United States)

Martínez-González, Nahara Anani; Plate, Andreas; Senn, Oliver; Markun, Stefan; Rosemann, Thomas; Neuner-Jehle, Stefan

2018-02-23

Men facing prostate cancer screening and treatment need to make critical and highly preference-sensitive decisions that involve a variety of potential benefits and risks. Shared decision-making (SDM) is considered fundamental for "preference-sensitive" medical decisions and it is guideline-recommended. There is no single definition of SDM however. We systematically reviewed the extent of SDM implementation in interventions to facilitate SDM for prostate cancer screening and treatment. We searched Medline Ovid, Embase (Elsevier), CINHAL (EBSCOHost), The Cochrane Library (Wiley), PsychINFO (EBSCOHost), Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov, ISRCTN registry, the WHO search portal, ohri.ca, opengrey.eu, Google Scholar, and the reference lists of included studies, clinical guidelines and relevant reviews. We also contacted the authors of relevant abstracts without available full text. We included primary peer-reviewed and grey literature of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reported in English, conducted in primary and specialised care, addressing interventions aiming to facilitate SDM for prostate cancer screening and treatment. Two reviewers independently selected studies, appraised interventions and assessed the extent of SDM implementation based on the key features of SDM, namely information exchange, deliberation and implementation. We considered bi-directional deliberation as a central and mandatory component of SDM. We performed a narrative synthesis. Thirty-six RCTs including 19 196 randomised patients met the eligibility criteria; they were mainly conducted in North America (n = 28). The median year of publication was 2008 (1997-2015). Twenty-three RCTs addressed decision-making for screening, twelve for treatment and one for both screening and treatment for prostate cancer. Bi-directional interactions between healthcare providers and patients were verified in 31 RCTs, but only 14 fulfilled the three key SDM features, 14 had at least "deliberation", one had "unclear

Development and Evaluation of Computer-Based Versions of the Decision Board for Early Breast Cancer

National Research Council Canada - National Science Library

Whelan, Timothy

2003-01-01

.... Randomized trials have demonstrated that the Decision Board not only increases patient knowledge, but improves patient satisfaction, decreases decisional conflict, and facilitates a shared decision...

Primary Care Physician Involvement in Shared Decision Making for Critically Ill Patients and Family Satisfaction with Care.

Science.gov (United States)

Huang, Kevin B; Weber, Urs; Johnson, Jennifer; Anderson, Nathanial; Knies, Andrea K; Nhundu, Belinda; Bautista, Cynthia; Poskus, Kelly; Sheth, Kevin N; Hwang, David Y

2018-01-01

An intensive care unit (ICU) patient's primary care physician (PCP) may be able to assist family with certain ICU shared medical decisions. We explored whether families of patients in nonopen ICUs who nevertheless report involvement of a patient's PCP in medical decision making are more satisfied with ICU shared decision making than families who do not. Between March 2013 and December 2015, we administered the Family Satisfaction in the ICU 24 survey to family members of adult neuroscience ICU patients. We compared the mean score for the survey subsection regarding shared decision making (graded on a 100-point scale), as well as individual survey items, between those who reported the patient's PCP involvement in any medical decision making versus those who did not. Among 263 respondents, there was no difference in mean overall decision-making satisfaction scores for those who reported involvement (81.1; SD = 15.2) versus those who did not (80.1; SD = 12.8; P = .16). However, a higher proportion reporting involvement felt completely satisfied with their 1) inclusion in the ICU decision making process (75.9% vs 61.4%; P = .055), and 2) control over the care of the patient (73.6% vs 55.6%; P = .02), with no difference regarding consistency of clinical information provided by the medical team (64.8% vs 63.5%; P = 1.00). Families who report involvement of a patient's PCP in medical decision making for critically ill patients may be more satisfied than those who do not with regard to specific aspects of ICU decision making. Further research would help understand how best to engage PCPs in shared decisions. © Copyright 2018 by the American Board of Family Medicine.

Group Health's participation in a shared decision-making demonstration yielded lessons, such as role of culture change.

Science.gov (United States)

King, Jaime; Moulton, Benjamin

2013-02-01

In 2007 Washington State became the first state to enact legislation encouraging the use of shared decision making and decision aids to address deficiencies in the informed-consent process. Group Health volunteered to fulfill a legislated mandate to study the costs and benefits of integrating these shared decision-making processes into clinical practice across a range of conditions for which multiple treatment options are available. The Group Health Demonstration Project, conducted during 2009-11, yielded five key lessons for successful implementation, including the synergy between efforts to reduce practice variation and increase shared decision making; the need to support modifications in practice with changes in physician training and culture; and the value of identifying best implementation methods through constant evaluation and iterative improvement. These lessons, and the legislated provisions that supported successful implementation, can guide other states and health care institutions moving toward informed patient choice as the standard of care for medical decision making.

The Choice Project: Peer Workers Promoting Shared Decision Making at a Youth Mental Health Service.

Science.gov (United States)

Simmons, Magenta Bender; Batchelor, Samantha; Dimopoulos-Bick, Tara; Howe, Deb

2017-08-01

In youth mental health services, consumer participation is essential, but few implementation strategies exist to engage young consumers. This project evaluated an intervention implemented in an Australian youth mental health service that utilized peer workers to promote shared decision making via an online tool. All new clients ages 16-25 were invited to participate in this nonrandomized comparative study, which used a historical comparison group (N=80). Intervention participants (N=149) engaged with a peer worker and used the online tool before and during their intake assessment. Pre- and postintake data were collected for both groups; measures included decisional conflict, perceived shared decision making, and satisfaction. A series of paired t tests, analyses of variance, and multiple regressions were conducted to assess differences in scores across intervention and comparison groups and pre- and postintake assessments. Ratings of perceived shared decision making with intake workers were higher in the intervention group than in the comparison group (p=.015). In both groups, decisional conflict scores were significantly lower after the intake assessment (pdecision making and lower decisional conflict were associated with satisfaction (pdecision making reported feeling more involved in their assessment. Feeling involved and having lower decisional conflict after seeing an intake worker were important for client satisfaction. These findings demonstrate the importance of both peer work and shared decision making for promoting optimal outcomes in youth mental health services.

Retrieval of publications addressing shared decision making: an evaluation of full-text searches on medical journal websites.

Science.gov (United States)

Blanc, Xavier; Collet, Tinh-Hai; Auer, Reto; Iriarte, Pablo; Krause, Jan; Légaré, France; Cornuz, Jacques; Clair, Carole

2015-04-07

Full-text searches of articles increase the recall, defined by the proportion of relevant publications that are retrieved. However, this method is rarely used in medical research due to resource constraints. For the purpose of a systematic review of publications addressing shared decision making, a full-text search method was required to retrieve publications where shared decision making does not appear in the title or abstract. The objective of our study was to assess the efficiency and reliability of full-text searches in major medical journals for identifying shared decision making publications. A full-text search was performed on the websites of 15 high-impact journals in general internal medicine to look up publications of any type from 1996-2011 containing the phrase "shared decision making". The search method was compared with a PubMed search of titles and abstracts only. The full-text search was further validated by requesting all publications from the same time period from the individual journal publishers and searching through the collected dataset. The full-text search for "shared decision making" on journal websites identified 1286 publications in 15 journals compared to 119 through the PubMed search. The search within the publisher-provided publications of 6 journals identified 613 publications compared to 646 with the full-text search on the respective journal websites. The concordance rate was 94.3% between both full-text searches. Full-text searching on medical journal websites is an efficient and reliable way to identify relevant articles in the field of shared decision making for review or other purposes. It may be more widely used in biomedical research in other fields in the future, with the collaboration of publishers and journals toward open-access data.

Information Sharing Framework (ISF) for Facilitating Development of Fast Reactors and Fuel Cycles

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Kawakubo, Y.; Hoffheins, B.; Inoue, N.; Mongiello, R.; Baldwin, G.; Lee, N.Y.; Chung, Jinho; Kwon, Eun-ha

2013-01-01

Conclusion: • Requirements for ISF is currently under development by JAEA, SNL, KINAC and KAERI. • Requirements seek to help implement information sharing following PDCA cycle. • Requirements development is still underway, but expected to be finalized in near future. • Demonstration of ISF will be implemented as the next step. • ISF is expected to facilitate FR avoiding regional NP/NS concerns in a sustainable manner

A Web-Based Tool to Support Shared Decision Making for People With a Psychotic Disorder: Randomized Controlled Trial and Process Evaluation

Science.gov (United States)

Emerencia, Ando C; Boonstra, Nynke; Wunderink, Lex; de Jonge, Peter; Sytema, Sjoerd

2013-01-01

Background Mental health policy makers encourage the development of electronic decision aids to increase patient participation in medical decision making. Evidence is needed to determine whether these decision aids are helpful in clinical practice and whether they lead to increased patient involvement and better outcomes. Objective This study reports the outcome of a randomized controlled trial and process evaluation of a Web-based intervention to facilitate shared decision making for people with psychotic disorders. Methods The study was carried out in a Dutch mental health institution. Patients were recruited from 2 outpatient teams for patients with psychosis (N=250). Patients in the intervention condition (n=124) were provided an account to access a Web-based information and decision tool aimed to support patients in acquiring an overview of their needs and appropriate treatment options provided by their mental health care organization. Patients were given the opportunity to use the Web-based tool either on their own (at their home computer or at a computer of the service) or with the support of an assistant. Patients in the control group received care as usual (n=126). Half of the patients in the sample were patients experiencing a first episode of psychosis; the other half were patients with a chronic psychosis. Primary outcome was patient-perceived involvement in medical decision making, measured with the Combined Outcome Measure for Risk Communication and Treatment Decision-making Effectiveness (COMRADE). Process evaluation consisted of questionnaire-based surveys, open interviews, and researcher observation. Results In all, 73 patients completed the follow-up measurement and were included in the final analysis (response rate 29.2%). More than one-third (48/124, 38.7%) of the patients who were provided access to the Web-based decision aid used it, and most used its full functionality. No differences were found between the intervention and control conditions

Factors influencing women's perceptions of shared decision making during labor and delivery: Results from a large-scale cohort study of first childbirth.

Science.gov (United States)

Attanasio, Laura B; Kozhimannil, Katy B; Kjerulff, Kristen H

2018-06-01

To examine correlates of shared decision making during labor and delivery. Data were from a cohort of women who gave birth to their first baby in Pennsylvania, 2009-2011 (N = 3006). We used logistic regression models to examine the association between labor induction and mode of delivery in relation to women's perceptions of shared decision making, and to investigate race/ethnicity and SES as potential moderators. Women who were Black and who did not have a college degree or private insurance were less likely to report high shared decision making, as well as women who underwent labor induction, instrumental vaginal or cesarean delivery. Models with interaction terms showed that the reduction in odds of shared decision making associated with cesarean delivery was greater for Black women than for White women. Women in marginalized social groups were less likely to report shared decision making during birth and Black women who delivered by cesarean had particularly low odds of shared decision making. Strategies designed to improve the quality of patient-provider communication, information sharing, and shared decision making must be attentive to the needs of vulnerable groups to ensure that such interventions reduce rather than widen disparities. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Perspectives on Cybersecurity Information Sharing among Multiple Stakeholders Using a Decision-Theoretic Approach.

Science.gov (United States)

He, Meilin; Devine, Laura; Zhuang, Jun

2018-02-01

The government, private sectors, and others users of the Internet are increasingly faced with the risk of cyber incidents. Damage to computer systems and theft of sensitive data caused by cyber attacks have the potential to result in lasting harm to entities under attack, or to society as a whole. The effects of cyber attacks are not always obvious, and detecting them is not a simple proposition. As the U.S. federal government believes that information sharing on cybersecurity issues among organizations is essential to safety, security, and resilience, the importance of trusted information exchange has been emphasized to support public and private decision making by encouraging the creation of the Information Sharing and Analysis Center (ISAC). Through a decision-theoretic approach, this article provides new perspectives on ISAC, and the advent of the new Information Sharing and Analysis Organizations (ISAOs), which are intended to provide similar benefits to organizations that cannot fit easily into the ISAC structure. To help understand the processes of information sharing against cyber threats, this article illustrates 15 representative information sharing structures between ISAC, government, and other participating entities, and provide discussions on the strategic interactions between different stakeholders. This article also identifies the costs of information sharing and information security borne by different parties in this public-private partnership both before and after cyber attacks, as well as the two main benefits. This article provides perspectives on the mechanism of information sharing and some detailed cost-benefit analysis. © 2017 Society for Risk Analysis.

Better decision making in complex, dynamic tasks training with human-facilitated interactive learning environments

CERN Document Server

Qudrat-Ullah, Hassan

2015-01-01

This book describes interactive learning environments (ILEs) and their underlying concepts. It explains how ILEs can be used to improve the decision-making process and how these improvements can be empirically verified. The objective of this book is to enhance our understanding of and to gain insights into the process by which human facilitated ILEs are effectively designed and used in improving users’ decision making in complex, dynamic tasks. This book is divided into four major parts. Part I serves as an introduction to the importance and complexity of decision making in dynamic tasks. Part II provides background material, drawing upon relevant literature, for the development of an integrated process model on the effectiveness of human facilitated ILEs in improving decision making in dynamic tasks. Part III focuses on the design, development, and application of FishBankILE in laboratory experiments to gather empirical evidence for the validity of the process model. Finally, part IV presents a comprehensi...

Polyamine sharing between tubulin dimers favours microtubule nucleation and elongation via facilitated diffusion.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Alain Mechulam

2009-01-01

Full Text Available We suggest for the first time that the action of multivalent cations on microtubule dynamics can result from facilitated diffusion of GTP-tubulin to the microtubule ends. Facilitated diffusion can promote microtubule assembly, because, upon encountering a growing nucleus or the microtubule wall, random GTP-tubulin sliding on their surfaces will increase the probability of association to the target sites (nucleation sites or MT ends. This is an original explanation for understanding the apparent discrepancy between the high rate of microtubule elongation and the low rate of tubulin association at the microtubule ends in the viscous cytoplasm. The mechanism of facilitated diffusion requires an attraction force between two tubulins, which can result from the sharing of multivalent counterions. Natural polyamines (putrescine, spermidine, and spermine are present in all living cells and are potent agents to trigger tubulin self-attraction. By using an analytical model, we analyze the implication of facilitated diffusion mediated by polyamines on nucleation and elongation of microtubules. In vitro experiments using pure tubulin indicate that the promotion of microtubule assembly by polyamines is typical of facilitated diffusion. The results presented here show that polyamines can be of particular importance for the regulation of the microtubule network in vivo and provide the basis for further investigations into the effects of facilitated diffusion on cytoskeleton dynamics.

Knowing Better: Improving Collective Decision Making in Higher Education Shared Governance

Science.gov (United States)

Manick, Christopher J. D.

2016-01-01

This dissertation addresses the question: Should higher education governance and decision-making be an elite or collective responsibility? It brings into conversation (i) the debate over the future of shared (i.e. participatory, faculty) governance in higher education, and (ii) research in democratic theory, specifically the epistemic defense of…

Trouble in Paradise: Teacher Conflicts in Shared Decision Making. NCEL Occasional Paper No. 8.

Science.gov (United States)

Weiss, Carol H.; And Others

Drawing on interviews with 180 staff members from 45 public high schools in 15 states, this document examines the advantages and disadvantages of teacher participation in shared decision making. The settings of six high schools that had structured mechanisms for teacher participation in school decisions are described, and problems that emerged…

Feasibility of preference-driven radiotherapy dose treatment planning to support shared decision making in anal cancer

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Rønde, Heidi S; Wee, Leonard; Pløen, John

2017-01-01

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Chemo-radiotherapy is an established primary curative treatment for anal cancer, but clinically equal rationale for different target doses exists. If joint preferences (physician and patient) are used to determine acceptable tradeoffs in radiotherapy treatment planning, multipl...... that preference-informed dose planning is feasible for clinical studies utilizing shared decision making....... dose plans must be simultaneously explored. We quantified the degree to which different toxicity priorities might be incorporated into treatment plan selection, to elucidate the feasible decision space for shared decision making in anal cancer radiotherapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective plans.......7%-points; (0.3; 30.6); p decision space available in anal cancer radiotherapy to incorporate preferences, although tradeoffs are highly patient-dependent. This study demonstrates...

Making cognitive decision support work: Facilitating adoption, knowledge and behavior change through QI.

Science.gov (United States)

Weir, Charlene; Brunker, Cherie; Butler, Jorie; Supiano, Mark A

2017-07-01

This paper evaluates the role of facilitation in the successful implementation of Computerized Decision Support (CDS). Facilitation processes include education, specialized computerized decision support, and work process reengineering. These techniques, as well as modeling and feedback enhance self-efficacy, which we propose is one of the factors that mediate the effectiveness of any CDS. In this study, outpatient clinics implemented quality improvement (QI) projects focused on improving geriatric care. Quality Improvement is the systematic process of improving quality through continuous measurement and targeted actions. The program, entitled "Advancing Geriatric Education through Quality Improvement" (AGE QI), consisted of a 6-month, QI based, intervention: (1) 2h didactic session, (2) 1h QI planning session, (3) computerized decision support design and implementation, (4) QI facilitation activities, (5) outcome feedback, and (6) 20h of CME. Specifically, we examined the impact of the QI based program on clinician's perceived self-efficacy in caring for older adults and the relationship of implementation support and facilitation on perceived success. The intervention was implemented at 3 institutions, 27 community healthcare system clinics, and 134 providers. This study reports the results of pre/post surveys for the forty-nine clinicians who completed the full CME program. Self-efficacy ratings for specific clinical behaviors related to care of older adults were assessed using a Likert based instrument. Self-ratings of efficacy improved across the following domains (depression, falls, end-of-life, functional status and medication management) and specifically in QI targeted domains and were associated with overall clinic improvements. Published by Elsevier Inc.

[Shared decision-making and communication theory: grounding the tango].

Science.gov (United States)

Kasper, Jürgen; Légaré, France; Scheibler, Fülöp; Geiger, Friedemann

2010-01-01

Shared decision-making (SDM) has the potential to overcome outdated social role models in the health care system. The concept, however, adheres to archaic epistemological assumptions as can be inferred from the rudimentary stage of the measurement methods used and from the information monopoly that the physician still holds in this concept. Advantages of an up-to-date model of knowledge for understanding and operationalising SDM are outlined. To this purpose, essential definitions of the concept are reflected in terms of epistemology. Accordingly, information emerges through a process of social construction. Likewise, interpersonal relations do not represent a static condition; rather, they develop anew with each interaction. Therefore, constructs suitable to focus on dyadic interaction processes can be used as indicators of sharing in SDM. Theories and methods of the interpersonal paradigm are advocated. Copyright © 2010. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

Information-sharing to promote informed choice in prenatal screening in the spirit of the SOGC clinical practice guideline: a proposal for an alternative model.

Science.gov (United States)

Vanstone, Meredith; Kinsella, Elizabeth Anne; Nisker, Jeff

2012-03-01

The 2011 SOGC clinical practice guideline "Prenatal Screening for Fetal Aneuploidy in Singleton Pregnancies" recommends that clinicians offer prenatal screening to all pregnant women and provide counselling in a non-directive manner. Non-directive counselling is intended to facilitate autonomous decision-making and remove the clinician's views regarding a particular course of action. However, recent research in genetic counselling raises concerns that non-directive counselling is neither possible nor desirable, and that it may not be the best way to facilitate informed choice. We propose an alternative model of information-sharing specific to prenatal screening that combines attributes of the models of informative decision-making and shared decision-making. Our proposed model is intended to provide clinicians with a strategy to communicate information about prenatal screening in a way that facilitates a shared deliberative process and autonomous decision-making. Our proposed model may better prepare a pregnant woman to make an informed choice about participating in prenatal screening on the basis of her consideration of the medical information provided by her clinician and her particular circumstances and values.

Implementing shared decision making in routine mental health care.

Science.gov (United States)

Slade, Mike

2017-06-01

Shared decision making (SDM) in mental health care involves clinicians and patients working together to make decisions. The key elements of SDM have been identified, decision support tools have been developed, and SDM has been recommended in mental health at policy level. Yet implementation remains limited. Two justifications are typically advanced in support of SDM. The clinical justification is that SDM leads to improved outcome, yet the available empirical evidence base is inconclusive. The ethical justification is that SDM is a right, but clinicians need to balance the biomedical ethical principles of autonomy and justice with beneficence and non-maleficence. It is argued that SDM is "polyvalent", a sociological concept which describes an idea commanding superficial but not deep agreement between disparate stakeholders. Implementing SDM in routine mental health services is as much a cultural as a technical problem. Three challenges are identified: creating widespread access to high-quality decision support tools; integrating SDM with other recovery-supporting interventions; and responding to cultural changes as patients develop the normal expectations of citizenship. Two approaches which may inform responses in the mental health system to these cultural changes - social marketing and the hospitality industry - are identified. © 2017 World Psychiatric Association.

Sharing decisions on SDM skills teaching

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Nielsen, Annegrethe

decision making (SDM) are currently subjects to special attention in the Danish healthcare system. Recent research has shown that many Danish professionals find it difficult to implement SDM in their clinical practice. Following a pilot project for midwives in 2013, an interdisciplinary course...... for professionals involved in antenatal care and obstetrics was conducted. Aim The aim of the course was: • teaching a group of professionals the skills of SDM • enhancing the awareness of the complex task of SDM • developing competence within the group of professionals to secure an ongoing awareness and training...... had been participants in the pilot project. As the course’ activities were carried out the two midwives became increasingly involved in facilitating the teaching activities with their colleagues in the hope that the focus on communication skills development can be retained. Plan of the course...

Surgical Consultation as Social Process: Implications for Shared Decision Making.

Science.gov (United States)

Clapp, Justin T; Arriaga, Alexander F; Murthy, Sushila; Raper, Steven E; Schwartz, J Sanford; Barg, Frances K; Fleisher, Lee A

2017-12-12

This qualitative study examines surgical consultation as a social process and assesses its alignment with assumptions of the shared decision-making (SDM) model. SDM stresses the importance of patient preferences and rigorous discussion of therapeutic risks/benefits based on these preferences. However, empirical studies have highlighted discrepancies between SDM and realities of surgical decision making. Qualitative research can inform understanding of the decision-making process and allow for granular assessment of the nature and causes of these discrepancies. We observed consultations between 3 general surgeons and 45 patients considering undergoing 1 of 2 preference-sensitive elective operations: (1) hernia repair, or (2) cholecystectomy. These patients and surgeons also participated in semi-structured interviews. By the time of the consultation, patients and surgeons were predisposed toward certain decisions by preceding events occurring elsewhere. During the visit, surgeons had differential ability to arbitrate surgical intervention and construct the severity of patients' conditions. These upstream dynamics frequently displaced the centrality of the risk/benefit-based consent discussion. The influence of events preceding consultation suggests that decision-making models should account for broader spatiotemporal spans. Given surgeons' authority to define patients' conditions and control service provision, SDM may be premised on an overestimation of patients' power to alter the course of decision making once in a specialist's office. Considering the subordinate role of the risk/benefit discussion in many surgical decisions, it will be important to study if and how the social process of decision making is altered by SDM-oriented decision aids that foreground this discussion.

Influence of English proficiency on patient-provider communication and shared decision-making.

Science.gov (United States)

Paredes, Anghela Z; Idrees, Jay J; Beal, Eliza W; Chen, Qinyu; Cerier, Emily; Okunrintemi, Victor; Olsen, Griffin; Sun, Steven; Cloyd, Jordan M; Pawlik, Timothy M

2018-06-01

The number of patients in the United States (US) who speak a language other than English is increasing. We evaluated the impact of English proficiency on self-reported patient-provider communication and shared decision-making. The 2013-2014 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey database was utilized to identify respondents who spoke a language other than English. Patient-provider communication (PPC) and shared decision-making (SDM) scores from 4-12 were categorized as "poor" (4-7), "average" (8-11), and "optimal." The relationship between PPC, SDM, and English proficiency was analyzed. Among 13,880 respondents, most were white (n = 10,281, 75%), age 18-39 (n = 6,677, 48%), male (n = 7,275, 52%), middle income (n = 4,125, 30%), and born outside of the US (n = 9,125, 65%). English proficiency was rated as "very well" (n = 7,221, 52%), "well" (n = 2,378, 17%), "not well" (n = 2,820, 20%), or "not at all" (n = 1,463, 10%). On multivariable analysis, patients who rated their English as "well" (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.37-2.18) or "not well" (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.10-2.14) were more likely to report "poor" PPC (both P English proficiency as "not well" (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.04-1.65, P = .02). Decreased English proficiency was associated with worse self-reported patient-provider communication and shared decision-making. Attention to patients' language needs is critical to patient satisfaction and improved perception of care. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Exploring emotions and the shared decision-making process in pediatric primary care

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Francesca Dicé

2016-12-01

Full Text Available This paper aims to identify conversational interaction patterns in pediatrics with a focus on the shared decision-making process and dialogue about emotions in doctor–patient relationships. We documented conversations in 163 visits by 168 children in pediatric primary care; we observed, audiorecordered, transcribed and analyzed them with specific instruments of analysis of doctor patient relationship. Our survey was conducted in four pediatric primary care practices and 15 health providers were involved. The data collection period lasted three months and was undertaken twice a week on days. We analyzed visits with Verona Coding Definitions of Emotional Sequences (VR-CoDES and Observing Patient Involvement in Shared Decision Making (OPTION instruments. Frequencies of emotions’ signals (cues/concerns obtained using VR-CoDES were analyzed and compared with the OPTION ratings. We documented 318 cues/concerns for parents and 167 for children. The relationship between cues/concerns and Healthcare Providers responses was strongest in dialogues between parents and pediatricians. The conversational patterns focused on the procedures of the care, with little opportunities of dialogue about emerging emotions. We also observed limited possibilities for participant involvement, especially by children, due to several difficulties integrating dialogue about emotions and concordance processes. The conversations seemed to be characterized by rarity of shared decision making or attention to the informational value of children’s emotions. It could be useful to implement psychological interventions to achieve an enrichment of the dialogue between participants, helping them to incorporate emotions into conversations and to recognize decisional competences, necessary to concordance processes.

[Early detection in prostate cancer and shared decision making].

Science.gov (United States)

Junod, A F

2005-09-28

Screening of prostate cancer with PSA is a challenge for the aid to decision. Beside the rather mediocre characteristics of the screening test, there the additional problem of the peculiar biology of this cancer, with its late development and its ability to remain latent for a prolonged period. On the other hand, the treatment (surgery, irradiation) is associated with important side-effects: impotence and urinary leakage. Several studies, which appear to be a form of aid to information than aid to shared decision, have been carried out to analyse the effect of various modes of information on the behaviour of potential candidates to screening of prostate cancer, with the following results: better knowledge of the problem, lower rate of acceptance of PSA testing and trend towards watchful waiting rather than surgery in case of discovery of cancer.

Facilitating Data Sharing in the Behavioural Sciences

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

R de la Sablonnière

2012-03-01

Full Text Available In most scientific fields, significant improvements have been made in terms of data sharing among scientists and researchers. Although there are clear benefits to data sharing, there is at least one field where this norm has yet to be developed: the behavioural sciences. In this paper, we propose an innovative methodology as a means to change existing norms within the behavioural sciences and move towards increased data sharing. Based on recent advances in social psychology, we theorize that a Survey Research Instrument that takes into account basic psychological processes can be effective in promoting data sharing norms.

The use of video-based patient education for shared decision-making in the treatment of prostate cancer.

Science.gov (United States)

Gomella, L G; Albertsen, P C; Benson, M C; Forman, J D; Soloway, M S

2000-08-01

Increased consumerism, patient empowerment, and autonomy are creating a health care revolution. In recent years, the public has become better informed and more sophisticated. An extraordinary amount of treatment advice from books, the media, and the Internet is available to patients today, although much of it is confusing or conflicting. Consequently, the traditional, paternalistic doctor-patient relationship is yielding to a more consumerist one. The new dynamic is based on a participatory ethic and a change in the balance of power. This shared decision-making creates a true partnership between professionals and patients, in which each contributes equally to decisions about treatment or care. Evidence suggests that in diseases such as prostate cancer, where there may be a number of appropriate treatment options for a particular patient, shared decision-making may lead to improved clinical and quality-of-life outcomes. This article explores the evolving relationship between the physician and patient, the pros and cons of shared decision-making, and the use of video technology in the clinical setting. The authors review the use of medical decision aids, including a video-based educational program called CHOICES, in the treatment of prostate cancer and other diseases.

Facilitated workshop method to involve stakeholders and public in decision making process in radiological emergencies

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Mustonen, Raimo; Sinkko, Kari; Haemaelaeinen, Raimo P.

2006-01-01

International organisations in radiation protection have for many years recommended that key players, e.g. authorities, expert organisations, industry, producers of foodstuffs and even the public, should be involved in the planning of protective actions in case of a nuclear accident. In this work, we have developed and tested a facilitated workshop method where representatives from various fields of the society aim to identify and evaluate systematically protective actions. Decision analysis techniques have been applied in workshops in order to find out the most feasible countermeasure strategies and to make the decision making-process transparent and auditable. The work builds on case studies where it was assumed that a hypothetical accident had led to a release of considerable amounts of radionuclides and therefore various types of countermeasures should be considered. This paper provides experiences gained in several European countries on how to facilitate this kind of workshops and how modern decision analysis techniques can be applied in the decision-making process

Facilitated workshop method to involve stakeholders and public in decision making process in radiological emergencies

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Mustonen, Raimo; Sinkko, Kari [STUK-Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Helsinki (Finland). Research and Environmental Surveillance; Haemaelaeinen, Raimo P. [Helsinki Univ. of Technology, Helsinki (Finland). System Analysis Laboratory

2006-09-15

International organisations in radiation protection have for many years recommended that key players, e.g. authorities, expert organisations, industry, producers of foodstuffs and even the public, should be involved in the planning of protective actions in case of a nuclear accident. In this work, we have developed and tested a facilitated workshop method where representatives from various fields of the society aim to identify and evaluate systematically protective actions. Decision analysis techniques have been applied in workshops in order to find out the most feasible countermeasure strategies and to make the decision making-process transparent and auditable. The work builds on case studies where it was assumed that a hypothetical accident had led to a release of considerable amounts of radionuclides and therefore various types of countermeasures should be considered. This paper provides experiences gained in several European countries on how to facilitate this kind of workshops and how modern decision analysis techniques can be applied in the decision-making process.

Predictors of Shared Decision Making and Level of Agreement between Consumers and Providers in Psychiatric Care

Science.gov (United States)

Fukui, Sadaaki; Salyers, Michelle P.; Matthias, Marianne S.; Collins, Linda; Thompson, John; Coffman, Melinda; Torrey, William C.

2014-01-01

The purpose of this study was to quantitatively examine elements of shared decision making (SDM), and to establish empirical evidence for factors correlated with SDM and the level of agreement between consumer and provider in psychiatric care. Transcripts containing 128 audio-recorded medication check-up visits with eight providers at three community mental health centers were rated using the Shared Decision Making scale, adapted from Braddock’s Informed Decision Making Scale (Braddock et al., 1997; 1999; 2008). Multilevel regression analyses revealed that greater consumer activity in the session and greater decision complexity significantly predicted the SDM score. The best predictor of agreement between consumer and provider was “exploration of consumer preference,” with a four-fold increase in full agreement when consumer preferences were discussed more completely. Enhancing active consumer participation, particularly by incorporating consumer preferences in the decision making process appears to be an important factor in SDM. PMID:23299226

Patients' perception of their involvement in shared treatment decision making: Key factors in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease.

Science.gov (United States)

Veilleux, Sophie; Noiseux, Isabelle; Lachapelle, Nathalie; Kohen, Rita; Vachon, Luc; Guay, Brian White; Bitton, Alain; Rioux, John D

2018-02-01

This study aims to characterize the relationships between the quality of the information given by the physician, the involvement of the patient in shared decision making (SDM), and outcomes in terms of satisfaction and anxiety pertaining to the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). A Web survey was conducted among 200 Canadian patients affected with IBD. The theoretical model of SDM was adjusted using path analysis. SAS software was used for all statistical analyses. The quality of the knowledge transfer between the physician and the patient is significantly associated with the components of SDM: information comprehension, patient involvement and decision certainty about the chosen treatment. In return, patient involvement in SDM is significantly associated with higher satisfaction and, as a result, lower anxiety as regards treatment selection. This study demonstrates the importance of involving patients in shared treatment decision making in the context of IBD. Understanding shared decision making may motivate patients to be more active in understanding the relevant information for treatment selection, as it is related to their level of satisfaction, anxiety and adherence to treatment. This relationship should encourage physicians to promote shared decision making. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

How do patients from eastern and western Germany compare with regard to their preferences for shared decision making?

Science.gov (United States)

Hamann, Johannes; Bieber, Christiane; Elwyn, Glyn; Wartner, Eva; Hörlein, Elisabeth; Kissling, Werner; Toegel, Christfried; Berth, Hendrik; Linde, Klaus; Schneider, Antonius

2012-08-01

Increasing emphasis is being placed on involving patients in decisions concerning their health. This shift towards more patient engagement by health professionals and towards more desire by patients for participation may be partly based on socio-political factors. To compare the preferences for shared decision making of patients from eastern and western Germany we analysed five patient samples (n = 2318) (general practice patients and schizophrenia patients from eastern and western Germany). Patients' role preferences for shared decisions were measured using the decision-making subscale of the Autonomy Preference Index. Patients resident in eastern Germany expressed lower preferences for shared decision making than patients in western Germany. This was true after controlling for socio-demographic variables and for patient group. The cultural imprint (e.g. western vs. former communist society) seems to have a significant influence on patients' expectations and behaviour in the medical encounter. Health services providers need to be aware that health attitudes within the same health system might vary for historical and cultural reasons. The engagement of patients in medical decisions might not be susceptible to a 'one size fits all' approach; doctors should instead aim to accommodate the individual patient's desire for autonomy.

Shared Decisions That Count.

Science.gov (United States)

Schlechty, Phillip C.

1993-01-01

Advocates of participatory leadership, site-based management, and decentralization often assume that changing decision-making group composition will automatically improve the quality of decisions being made. Stakeholder satisfaction does not guarantee quality results. This article offers a framework for moving the decision-making discussion from…

Clinical trial or standard treatment? Shared decision making at the department of oncology

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Gregersen, Trine Ammentorp; Birkelund, Regner; Ammentorp, Jette

2016-01-01

Title: Clinical trial or standard treatment? Shared decision making at the department of oncology. Authors: Ph.d. student, Trine A. Gregersen. Trine.gregersen@rsyd.dk. Department of Oncology. Health Services Research Unit Lillebaelt Hospital / IRS University of Southern Denmark. Professor, Regner...... are involved in difficult treatment decisions including participation in clinical trials. The literature indicates that the decision is very often based on little knowledge about the treatment and that many patients who have consented to participate in a clinical trial are not always aware...... that they are participating in a trial. This place great demand on the healthcare providers’ ability to involve and advise patients in the decisions. The aim of this study is to investigate the characteristics of the communication when decisions about participation in clinical oncology trial are made and the patients...

Translating shared decision-making into health care clinical practices: Proof of concepts

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

St-Jacques Sylvie

2008-01-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background There is considerable interest today in shared decision-making (SDM, defined as a decision-making process jointly shared by patients and their health care provider. However, the data show that SDM has not been broadly adopted yet. Consequently, the main goal of this proposal is to bring together the resources and the expertise needed to develop an interdisciplinary and international research team on the implementation of SDM in clinical practice using a theory-based dyadic perspective. Methods Participants include researchers from Canada, US, UK, and Netherlands, representing medicine, nursing, psychology, community health and epidemiology. In order to develop a collaborative research network that takes advantage of the expertise of the team members, the following research activities are planned: 1 establish networking and on-going communication through internet-based forum, conference calls, and a bi-weekly e-bulletin; 2 hold a two-day workshop with two key experts (one in theoretical underpinnings of behavioral change, and a second in dyadic data analysis, and invite all investigators to present their views on the challenges related to the implementation of SDM in clinical practices; 3 conduct a secondary analyses of existing dyadic datasets to ensure that discussion among team members is grounded in empirical data; 4 build capacity with involvement of graduate students in the workshop and online forum; and 5 elaborate a position paper and an international multi-site study protocol. Discussion This study protocol aims to inform researchers, educators, and clinicians interested in improving their understanding of effective strategies to implement shared decision-making in clinical practice using a theory-based dyadic perspective.

Facilitating Treatment Decision Making Adjustment and Coping in Men Newly Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer

National Research Council Canada - National Science Library

Diefenbach, Michael

2003-01-01

The study evaluates an intervention designed to facilitate treatment decision making, adjustment, and coping among early-stage prostate cancer patients and their spouse/partners, in a randomized controlled trial...

Nanomaterial categorization for assessing risk potential to facilitate regulatory decision-making.

Science.gov (United States)

Godwin, Hilary; Nameth, Catherine; Avery, David; Bergeson, Lynn L; Bernard, Daniel; Beryt, Elizabeth; Boyes, William; Brown, Scott; Clippinger, Amy J; Cohen, Yoram; Doa, Maria; Hendren, Christine Ogilvie; Holden, Patricia; Houck, Keith; Kane, Agnes B; Klaessig, Frederick; Kodas, Toivo; Landsiedel, Robert; Lynch, Iseult; Malloy, Timothy; Miller, Mary Beth; Muller, Julie; Oberdorster, Gunter; Petersen, Elijah J; Pleus, Richard C; Sayre, Philip; Stone, Vicki; Sullivan, Kristie M; Tentschert, Jutta; Wallis, Philip; Nel, Andre E

2015-01-01

For nanotechnology to meet its potential as a game-changing and sustainable technology, it is important to ensure that the engineered nanomaterials and nanoenabled products that gain entry to the marketplace are safe and effective. Tools and methods are needed for regulatory purposes to allow rapid material categorization according to human health and environmental risk potential, so that materials of high concern can be targeted for additional scrutiny, while material categories that pose the least risk can receive expedited review. Using carbon nanotubes as an example, we discuss how data from alternative testing strategies can be used to facilitate engineered nanomaterial categorization according to risk potential and how such an approach could facilitate regulatory decision-making in the future.

Including all voices in international data-sharing governance.

Science.gov (United States)

Kaye, Jane; Terry, Sharon F; Juengst, Eric; Coy, Sarah; Harris, Jennifer R; Chalmers, Don; Dove, Edward S; Budin-Ljøsne, Isabelle; Adebamowo, Clement; Ogbe, Emilomo; Bezuidenhout, Louise; Morrison, Michael; Minion, Joel T; Murtagh, Madeleine J; Minari, Jusaku; Teare, Harriet; Isasi, Rosario; Kato, Kazuto; Rial-Sebbag, Emmanuelle; Marshall, Patricia; Koenig, Barbara; Cambon-Thomsen, Anne

2018-03-07

Governments, funding bodies, institutions, and publishers have developed a number of strategies to encourage researchers to facilitate access to datasets. The rationale behind this approach is that this will bring a number of benefits and enable advances in healthcare and medicine by allowing the maximum returns from the investment in research, as well as reducing waste and promoting transparency. As this approach gains momentum, these data-sharing practices have implications for many kinds of research as they become standard practice across the world. The governance frameworks that have been developed to support biomedical research are not well equipped to deal with the complexities of international data sharing. This system is nationally based and is dependent upon expert committees for oversight and compliance, which has often led to piece-meal decision-making. This system tends to perpetuate inequalities by obscuring the contributions and the important role of different data providers along the data stream, whether they be low- or middle-income country researchers, patients, research participants, groups, or communities. As research and data-sharing activities are largely publicly funded, there is a strong moral argument for including the people who provide the data in decision-making and to develop governance systems for their continued participation. We recommend that governance of science becomes more transparent, representative, and responsive to the voices of many constituencies by conducting public consultations about data-sharing addressing issues of access and use; including all data providers in decision-making about the use and sharing of data along the whole of the data stream; and using digital technologies to encourage accessibility, transparency, and accountability. We anticipate that this approach could enhance the legitimacy of the research process, generate insights that may otherwise be overlooked or ignored, and help to bring valuable

Collaborative decision-making and promoting treatment adherence in pediatric chronic illness

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Dennis Drotar

2010-03-01

Full Text Available Dennis Drotar, Peggy Crawford, Margaret BonnerCincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USAAbstract: Collaborative or shared decision-making between health care providers and families can facilitate treatment adherence, health outcomes, and satisfaction with care in the management of pediatric chronic illness, but raises special challenges. Barriers such as authoritarian models of medical care as well as absence of time and opportunity for dialogue limit collaborative decision making and can disrupt treatment adherence. However, models of provider-family communication that emphasize communication and shared goal-setting inform an anticipatory guidance model of collaborative decision-making that can enhance treatment adherence. Salient challenges and strategies involved in implementing collaborative decision-making in pediatric chronic illness care are described. Research is needed to: 1 describe the communication and decision-making process in the management of pediatric chronic illness; and 2 evaluate the impact of interventions that enhance collaborative decision-making on provider-family communication, illness management, and treatment adherence.Keywords: collaborative decision-making, shared decision-making, treatment adherence, pediatric chronic illness

Validating a conceptual model for an inter-professional approach to shared decision making: a mixed methods study

Science.gov (United States)

Légaré, France; Stacey, Dawn; Gagnon, Susie; Dunn, Sandy; Pluye, Pierre; Frosch, Dominick; Kryworuchko, Jennifer; Elwyn, Glyn; Gagnon, Marie-Pierre; Graham, Ian D

2011-01-01

Rationale, aims and objectives Following increased interest in having inter-professional (IP) health care teams engage patients in decision making, we developed a conceptual model for an IP approach to shared decision making (SDM) in primary care. We assessed the validity of the model with stakeholders in Canada. Methods In 15 individual interviews and 7 group interviews with 79 stakeholders, we asked them to: (1) propose changes to the IP-SDM model; (2) identify barriers and facilitators to the model's implementation in clinical practice; and (3) assess the model using a theory appraisal questionnaire. We performed a thematic analysis of the transcripts and a descriptive analysis of the questionnaires. Results Stakeholders suggested placing the patient at its centre; extending the concept of family to include significant others; clarifying outcomes; highlighting the concept of time; merging the micro, meso and macro levels in one figure; and recognizing the influence of the environment and emotions. The most common barriers identified were time constraints, insufficient resources and an imbalance of power among health professionals. The most common facilitators were education and training in inter-professionalism and SDM, motivation to achieve an IP approach to SDM, and mutual knowledge and understanding of disciplinary roles. Most stakeholders considered that the concepts and relationships between the concepts were clear and rated the model as logical, testable, having clear schematic representation, and being relevant to inter-professional collaboration, SDM and primary care. Conclusions Stakeholders validated the new IP-SDM model for primary care settings and proposed few modifications. Future research should assess if the model helps implement SDM in IP clinical practice. PMID:20695950

Shared decision making in West Africa: The forgotten area.

Science.gov (United States)

Diouf, Ndeye Thiab; Ben Charif, Ali; Adisso, Lionel; Adekpedjou, Rhéda; Zomahoun, Hervé Tchala Vignon; Agbadjé, Titilayo Tatiana; Dogba, Mama Joyce; Garvelink, Mirjam Marjolein

2017-06-01

Up to now, little attention has been paid to West Africa when it comes to shared decision making (SDM). West African countries seem to lag behind with regard to SDM initiatives compared to many other countries in the world. There is some interest in informed decision making or informed consent, but little in a full SDM process. Few decision-making tools are available for healthcare professionals and the majority are not designed to support decision-making with patients. Furthermore, to the best of our knowledge, there are no training programs for implementing SDM in healthcare teams. Many barriers exist to implementing SDM in West Africa, including lack of options, few or poor health resources and low levels of education. However, African countries present many opportunities for SDM as well. Existing SDM innovations developed for other populations with low literacy could be explored and adapted to the West African context, and research on implementation and outcomes in West Africa could contribute to SDM worldwide. West African countries are in an excellent position to both learn from other countries and contribute to SDM development in other parts of the world. In this paper we reflect on SDM challenges and opportunities, and propose a research agenda for West Africa. We hope to awaken interest in SDM in West Africa and encourage future collaborations on SDM with various West African stakeholders, including patients, healthcare professionals, policymakers, non-government organisations (NGOs) and academic institutions. Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

MAPPIN'SDM--the multifocal approach to sharing in shared decision making.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jürgen Kasper

Full Text Available BACKGROUND: The wide scale permeation of health care by the shared decision making concept (SDM reflects its relevance and advanced stage of development. An increasing number of studies evaluating the efficacy of SDM use instruments based on various sub-constructs administered from different viewpoints. However, as the concept has never been captured in operable core definition it is quite difficult to link these parts of evidence. This study aims at investigating interrelations of SDM indicators administered from different perspectives. METHOD: A comprehensive inventory was developed mapping judgements from different perspectives (observer, doctor, patient and constructs (behavior, perception referring to three units (doctor, patient, doctor-patient-dyad and an identical set of SDM-indicators. The inventory adopted the existing approaches, but added additional observer foci (patient and doctor-patient-dyad and relevant indicators hitherto neglected by existing instruments. The complete inventory comprising a doctor-patient-questionnaire and an observer-instrument was applied to 40 decision consultations from 10 physicians from different medical fields. Convergent validities were calculated on the basis of Pearson correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Reliabilities for all scales were high to excellent. No correlations were found between observer and patients or physicians neither for means nor for single items. Judgements of doctors and patients were moderately related. Correlations between the observer scales and within the subjective perspectives were high. Inter-perspective agreement was not related to SDM performance or patient activity. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates the contribution to involvement made by each of the relevant perspectives and emphasizes the need for an inter-subjective approach regarding SDM measurement.

Information and shared decision-making are top patients' priorities

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Bronstein Alexander

2006-02-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background The profound changes in medical care and the recent stress on a patient-centered approach mandate evaluation of current patient priorities. Methods Hospitalized and ambulatory patients at an academic medical center in central Israel were investigated. Consecutive patients (n = 274 indicated their first and second priority for a change or improvement in their medical care out of a mixed shortlist of 6 issues, 3 related to patient-physician relationship (being better informed and taking part in decisions; being seen by the same doctor each time; a longer consultation time and 3 issues related to the organizational aspect of care (easier access to specialists/hospital; shorter queue for tests; less charges for drugs. Results Getting more information from the physician and taking part in decisions was the most desirable patient choice, selected by 27.4% as their first priority. The next choices – access and queue – also relate to more patient autonomy and control over that of managed care regulations. Patients studied were least interested in continuity of care, consultation time or cost of drugs. Demographic or clinical variables were not significantly related to patients' choices. Conclusion Beyond its many benefits, being informed by their doctor and shared decision making is a top patient priority.

Shared decision making and medication management in the recovery process.

Science.gov (United States)

Deegan, Patricia E; Drake, Robert E

2006-11-01

Mental health professionals commonly conceptualize medication management for people with severe mental illness in terms of strategies to increase compliance or adherence. The authors argue that compliance is an inadequate construct because it fails to capture the dynamic complexity of autonomous clients who must navigate decisional conflicts in learning to manage disorders over the course of years or decades. Compliance is rooted in medical paternalism and is at odds with principles of person-centered care and evidence-based medicine. Using medication is an active process that involves complex decision making and a chance to work through decisional conflicts. It requires a partnership between two experts: the client and the practitioner. Shared decision making provides a model for them to assess a treatment's advantages and disadvantages within the context of recovering a life after a diagnosis of a major mental disorder.

Interventions for promoting participation in shared decision-making for children with cancer.

Science.gov (United States)

Coyne, Imelda; O'Mathúna, Dónal P; Gibson, Faith; Shields, Linda; Leclercq, Edith; Sheaf, Greg

2016-11-29

This is an update of the Cochrane systematic review of shared decision-making (SMD) making published in 2013. Children's rights to have their views heard in matters that affect their lives are now well established since the publication of the UN Convention treaty (1989). Children with cancer generally prefer to be involved in decision-making and consider it important that they have the opportunity to take part in decision-making concerning their health care, even in end-of-life decisions. There is considerable support for involving children in healthcare decision-making at a level commensurate with their experience, age and abilities. Thus, healthcare professionals and parents need to know how they should involve children in decision-making and what interventions are most effective in promoting SDM for children with cancer. To examine the effects of SDM interventions on the process of SDM for children with cancer who are aged four to 18 years. We searched the following sources for the review: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Studies (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 1); PubMed (NLM) (1946 to February 2016); Embase (Ovid) (1974 to February 2016); CINAHL (EBSCO) (1982 to February 2016); ERIC (ProQuest) (1966 to February 2016); PsycINFO (EBSCO) (1806 to February 2016); BIOSIS (Thomson Reuters) (1980 to December 2009 - subscription ceased at that date); ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (1637 to February 2016); and Sociological Abstracts (ProQuest) (1952 to February 2016). In addition we searched the reference lists of relevant articles and review articles and the following conference proceedings (2005 up to and including 2015): American Academy on Communication in Healthcare (AACH), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), European CanCer Organisation (ECCO), European Association for Communication in Healthcare (EACH), International Conference on Communication in Healthcare (ICCH), International Shared Decision Making Conference (ISDM), Annual

Shared decision-making at the end of life: A focus group study exploring the perceptions and experiences of multi-disciplinary healthcare professionals working in the home setting.

Science.gov (United States)

Brogan, Paula; Hasson, Felicity; McIlfatrick, Sonja

2018-01-01

Globally recommended in healthcare policy, Shared Decision-Making is also central to international policy promoting community palliative care. Yet realities of implementation by multi-disciplinary healthcare professionals who provide end-of-life care in the home are unclear. To explore multi-disciplinary healthcare professionals' perceptions and experiences of Shared Decision-Making at end of life in the home. Qualitative design using focus groups, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. A total of 43 participants, from multi-disciplinary community-based services in one region of the United Kingdom, were recruited. While the rhetoric of Shared Decision-Making was recognised, its implementation was impacted by several interconnecting factors, including (1) conceptual confusion regarding Shared Decision-Making, (2) uncertainty in the process and (3) organisational factors which impeded Shared Decision-Making. Multiple interacting factors influence implementation of Shared Decision-Making by professionals working in complex community settings at the end of life. Moving from rhetoric to reality requires future work exploring the realities of Shared Decision-Making practice at individual, process and systems levels.

Barriers to and Facilitators of Evidence-Based Decision Making at the Point of Care

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Ann S. O’Malley MD, MPH

2016-07-01

Full Text Available Introduction: Physicians vary widely in how they treat some health conditions, despite strong evidence favoring certain treatments over others. We examined physicians’ perspectives on factors that support or hinder evidence-based decisions and the implications for delivery systems, payers, and policymakers. Methods: We used Choosing Wisely ® recommendations to create four clinical vignettes for common types of decisions. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 36 specialists to identify factors that support or hinder evidence-based decisions. We examined these factors using a conceptual framework that includes six levels: patients, physicians, practice sites, organizations, networks and hospital affiliations, and the local market. In this model, population characteristics and payer and regulatory factors interact to influence decisions. Results: Patient openness to behavior modification and expectations, facilitated and hindered physicians in making evidence-based recommendations. Physicians’ communication skills were the most commonly mentioned facilitator. Practice site, organization, and hospital system barriers included measures of emergency department throughput, the order in which test options are listed in electronic health records (EHR, lack of relevant decision support in EHRs, and payment incentives that maximize billing and encourage procedures rather than medical management or counseling patients on behavior change. Factors from different levels interacted to undermine evidence-based care. Most physicians received billing feedback, but quality metrics on evidence-based service use were nonexistent for the four decisions in this study. Conclusions and Implications: Additional research and quality improvement may help to modify delivery systems to overcome barriers at multiple levels. Enhancing provider communication skills, improving decision support in EHRs, modifying workflows, and refining the design and interpretation of

Factors and outcomes of decision making for cancer clinical trial participation.

Science.gov (United States)

Biedrzycki, Barbara A

2011-09-01

To describe factors and outcomes related to the decision-making process regarding participation in a cancer clinical trial. Cross-sectional, descriptive. Urban, academic, National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center in the mid-Atlantic United States. 197 patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer. Mailed survey using one investigator-developed instrument, eight instruments used in published research, and a medical record review. disease context, sociodemographics, hope, quality of life, trust in healthcare system, trust in health professional, preference for research decision control, understanding risks, and information. decision to accept or decline research participation and satisfaction with this decision. All of the factors within the Research Decision Making Model together predicted cancer clinical trial participation and satisfaction with this decision. The most frequently preferred decision-making style for research participation was shared (collaborative) (83%). Multiple factors affect decision making for cancer clinical trial participation and satisfaction with this decision. Shared decision making previously was an unrecognized factor and requires further investigation. Enhancing the process of research decision making may facilitate an increase in cancer clinical trial enrollment rates. Oncology nurses have unique opportunities as educators and researchers to support shared decision making by those who prefer this method for deciding whether to accept or decline cancer clinical trial participation.

What makes it so difficult for nurses to coach patients in shared decision making? A process evaluation.

Science.gov (United States)

Lenzen, Stephanie Anna; Daniëls, Ramon; van Bokhoven, Marloes Amantia; van der Weijden, Trudy; Beurskens, Anna

2018-04-01

Primary care nurses play a crucial role in coaching patients in shared decision making about goals and actions. This presents a challenge to practice nurses, who are frequently used to protocol-based working routines. Therefore, an approach was developed to support nurses to coach patients in shared decision making. To investigate how the approach was implemented and experienced by practice nurses and patients. A process evaluation was conducted using quantitative and qualitative methods. Fifteen female practice nurses (aged between 28 and 55 years), working with people suffering from diabetes, COPD, asthma and/or cardiovascular diseases, participated. Nurses were asked to apply the approach to their chronically ill patients and to recruit patients (n = 10) willing to participate in an interview or an audio-recording of a consultation (n = 13); patients (13 women, 10 men) were aged between 41 and 88 years and suffered from diabetes, COPD or cardiovascular diseases. The approach involved a framework for shared decision making about goals and actions, a tool to explore the patient perspective, a patient profiles model and a training course. Interviews (n = 15) with nurses, a focus group with nurses (n = 9) and interviews with patients (n = 10) were conducted. Nurses filled in a questionnaire about their work routine before, during and after the training course. They were asked to deliver audiotapes of their consultations (n = 13). Overall, nurses felt that the approach supported them to coach patients in shared decision making. Nurses had become more aware of their own attitudes and learning needs and reported to have had more in-depth discussions with patients. The on-the-job coaching was experienced as valuable. However, nurses struggled to integrate the approach in routine care. They experienced the approach as different to their protocol-based routines and expressed the importance of receiving support and the need for integration of the

A shared decision-making tool for obstructive sleep apnea without tonsillar hypertrophy: A randomized controlled trial.

Science.gov (United States)

Bergeron, Mathieu; Duggins, Angela L; Cohen, Aliza P; Tiemeyer, Karin; Mullen, Lisa; Crisalli, Joseph; McArthur, Angela; Ishman, Stacey L

2018-04-01

Shared decision-making is a process whereby patients and clinicians jointly establish a treatment plan integrating clinical evidence and patient values and preferences. Although this approach has been successfully employed in numerous medical disciplines, often using shared decision-making tools, otolaryngologic research assessing its use is scant. Our primary objective was therefore to determine if the tools we developed reduced decisional conflict for children with obstructive sleep apnea without tonsillar hypertrophy. Prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial. We enrolled consecutive patients meeting inclusion criteria who were referred to our multidisciplinary upper airway center. Study patients used a shared decision-making tool whereas controls did not. Measures of decisional conflict (SURE [Sure of myself, Understanding information, Risk benefit ratio, Encouragement], CollaboRATE, and the Decisional Conflict Scale [DCS]) were obtained pre- and postvisit. We assessed 50 families (study group = 24, controls = 26). The mean age was 8.8 ± 6.6 years, 44% were female, 86% were white, and the mean obstructive apnea-hypopnea index was 12.7 ± 15.6 events/hour. The previsit mean DCS score was similar for controls (42.7) and study patients (40.8) (P = .38). The postvisit mean DCS score for controls was 13.3 and for study patients 6.1 (P = .034). Improvement in this score was greater in the study group (P = .03). At previsit evaluation, 63% of controls and 58% of study patients were unsure about their options. Postvisit, this improved to 4.1% and 0%, respectively. Families counseled regarding treatment options using shared decision-making tools had significantly less decisional conflict than those who did not use these tools. These positive outcomes suggest that clinicians should consider integrating this approach into clinical practice. 1b. Laryngoscope, 128:1007-1015, 2018. © 2017 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.

Shared decision making and patient decision aids: knowledge, attitudes, and practices among Hawai'i physicians.

Science.gov (United States)

Alden, Dana L; Friend, John; Chun, Maria B J

2013-11-01

As the health care field moves toward patient-centered care (PCC), increasing emphasis has been placed on the benefits of patient decision aids for promoting shared decision making (SDM). This study provides a baseline measure of knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) among Hawai'i's physicians with respect to patient decision aids (DAs). Physicians throughout the State of Hawai'i were invited to complete a survey assessing their knowledge, attitudes, and practices with respect to the clinical use of DAs. One hundred and seventy four valid surveys were analyzed. Reported awareness and use of DAs were low, but recognition of the benefits of SDM and openness to the use of DAs were very high. The leading perceived barriers to the implementation of DAs were lack of awareness, lack of resources, and limited physician time to learn about DA technology. However, a significant majority of the respondents reported that DAs could empower patients by improving knowledge (88%), increasing satisfaction with the consultation process (81%), and increasing compliance (74%). Among physicians currently employing DAs, use of brochures or options matrix sheets was the most common aid tool. However, leading recommended DA formats were paper-based brochures for clinic use (75%) and interactive online website programs for outside clinic use (73.5%). Given growing emphasis on the PCC model and the recognized desire of many patients to participate in the medical decision making process, positive responses toward SDM and the use of DAs by Hawai'i physicians are promising.

What Factors are Associated with Consumer Initiation of Shared Decision Making in Mental Health Visits?

OpenAIRE

Matthias, Marianne S.; Fukui, Sadaaki; Salyers, Michelle P.

2017-01-01

Understanding consumer initiation of shared decision making (SDM) is critical to improving SDM in mental health consultations, particularly because providers do not always invite consumer participation in treatment decisions. This study examined the association between consumer initiation of nine elements of SDM as measured by the SDM scale, and measures of consumer illness self-management and the consumer-provider relationship. In 63 mental health visits, three SDM elements were associated w...

A model-driven privacy compliance decision support for medical data sharing in Europe.

Science.gov (United States)

Boussi Rahmouni, H; Solomonides, T; Casassa Mont, M; Shiu, S; Rahmouni, M

2011-01-01

Clinical practitioners and medical researchers often have to share health data with other colleagues across Europe. Privacy compliance in this context is very important but challenging. Automated privacy guidelines are a practical way of increasing users' awareness of privacy obligations and help eliminating unintentional breaches of privacy. In this paper we present an ontology-plus-rules based approach to privacy decision support for the sharing of patient data across European platforms. We use ontologies to model the required domain and context information about data sharing and privacy requirements. In addition, we use a set of Semantic Web Rule Language rules to reason about legal privacy requirements that are applicable to a specific context of data disclosure. We make the complete set invocable through the use of a semantic web application acting as an interactive privacy guideline system can then invoke the full model in order to provide decision support. When asked, the system will generate privacy reports applicable to a specific case of data disclosure described by the user. Also reports showing guidelines per Member State may be obtained. The advantage of this approach lies in the expressiveness and extensibility of the modelling and inference languages adopted and the ability they confer to reason with complex requirements interpreted from high level regulations. However, the system cannot at this stage fully simulate the role of an ethics committee or review board.

A brief educational intervention to teach residents shared decision making in the intensive care unit.

Science.gov (United States)

Yuen, Jacqueline K; Mehta, Sonal S; Roberts, Jordan E; Cooke, Joseph T; Reid, M Carrington

2013-05-01

Effective communication is essential for shared decision making with families of critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), yet there is limited evidence on effective strategies to teach these skills. The study's objective was to pilot test an educational intervention to teach internal medicine interns skills in discussing goals of care and treatment decisions with families of critically ill patients using the shared decision making framework. The intervention consisted of a PowerPoint online module followed by a four-hour workshop implemented at a retreat for medicine interns training at an urban, academic medical center. Participants (N=33) completed post-intervention questionnaires that included self-assessed skills learned, an open-ended question on the most important learning points from the workshop, and retrospective pre- and post-workshop comfort level with ICU communication skills. Participants rated their satisfaction with the workshop. Twenty-nine interns (88%) completed the questionnaires. Important self-assessed communication skills learned reflect key components of shared decision making, which include assessing the family's understanding of the patient's condition (endorsed by 100%) and obtaining an understanding of the patient/family's perspectives, values, and goals (100%). Interns reported significant improvement in their comfort level with ICU communication skills (pre 3.26, post 3.73 on a five-point scale, p=0.004). Overall satisfaction with the intervention was high (mean 4.45 on a five-point scale). The findings suggest that a brief intervention designed to teach residents communication skills in conducting goals of care and treatment discussions in the ICU is feasible and can improve their comfort level with these conversations.

Community facilitation of problem structuring and decision making processes: Experiences from the EU LEADER+ programme

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Vidal, Rene Victor Valqui

2009-01-01

This paper reports on the work carried out supporting a rural community in Denmark under the LEADER+ programme. This is a programme that supports development in particularly vulnerable rural regions of the European countries members of EU. It supports creative and innovative projects that can...... contribute to long-term and sustainable development in these regions. The main tasks have been the organisation and facilitation of conferences and workshops to structure the problematic situation of identifying and designing innovative projects for the development of the community and to support decision...... making processes related to the agreement on action plans. Learning to design, plan, manage and facilitate conferences and workshops have also being another central activity. The main purpose of these conferences and workshops was not only problem structuring and decision making in connection...

Ethics of End of Life Decisions in Pediatrics: A Narrative Review of the Roles of Caregivers, Shared Decision-Making, and Patient Centered Values

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jonathan D. Santoro

2018-04-01

Full Text Available Background: This manuscript reviews unique aspects of end of life decision-making in pediatrics. Methods: A narrative literature review of pediatric end of life issues was performed in the English language. Results: While a paternalistic approach is typically applied to children with life-limiting medical prognoses, the cognitive, language, and physical variability in this patient population is wide and worthy of review. In end of life discussions in pediatrics, the consideration of a child’s input is often not reviewed in depth, although a shared decision-making model is ideal for use, even for children with presumed limitations due to age. This narrative review of end of life decision-making in pediatric care explores nomenclature, the introduction of the concept of death, relevant historical studies, limitations to the shared decision-making model, the current state of end of life autonomy in pediatrics, and future directions and needs. Although progress is being made toward a more uniform and standardized approach to care, few non-institutional protocols exist. Complicating factors in the lack of guidelines include the unique facets of pediatric end of life care, including physical age, paternalism, the cognitive and language capacity of patients, subconscious influencers of parents, and normative values of death in pediatrics. Conclusions: Although there have been strides in end of life decision-making in pediatrics, further investigation and research is needed in this field.

Ethics of End of Life Decisions in Pediatrics: A Narrative Review of the Roles of Caregivers, Shared Decision-Making, and Patient Centered Values.

Science.gov (United States)

Santoro, Jonathan D; Bennett, Mariko

2018-04-26

Background: This manuscript reviews unique aspects of end of life decision-making in pediatrics. Methods: A narrative literature review of pediatric end of life issues was performed in the English language. Results: While a paternalistic approach is typically applied to children with life-limiting medical prognoses, the cognitive, language, and physical variability in this patient population is wide and worthy of review. In end of life discussions in pediatrics, the consideration of a child’s input is often not reviewed in depth, although a shared decision-making model is ideal for use, even for children with presumed limitations due to age. This narrative review of end of life decision-making in pediatric care explores nomenclature, the introduction of the concept of death, relevant historical studies, limitations to the shared decision-making model, the current state of end of life autonomy in pediatrics, and future directions and needs. Although progress is being made toward a more uniform and standardized approach to care, few non-institutional protocols exist. Complicating factors in the lack of guidelines include the unique facets of pediatric end of life care, including physical age, paternalism, the cognitive and language capacity of patients, subconscious influencers of parents, and normative values of death in pediatrics. Conclusions: Although there have been strides in end of life decision-making in pediatrics, further investigation and research is needed in this field.

Acute renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy in the intensive care unit: impact on prognostic assessment for shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Johnson, Robert F; Gustin, Jillian

2011-07-01

A 69-year-old female was receiving renal replacement therapy (RRT) for acute renal failure (ARF) in an intensive care unit (ICU). Consultation was requested from the palliative medicine service to facilitate a shared decision-making process regarding goals of care. Clinician responsibility in shared decision making includes the formulation and expression of a prognostic assessment providing the necessary perspective for a spokesperson to match patient values with treatment options. For this patient, ARF requiring RRT in the ICU was used as a focal point for preparing a prognostic assessment. A prognostic assessment should include the outcomes of most importance to a discussion of goals of care: mortality risk and survivor functional status, in this case including renal recovery. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to document published data regarding these outcomes for adult patients receiving RRT for ARF in the ICU. Forty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The combined mean values for short-term mortality, long-term mortality, renal-function recovery of short-term survivors, and renal-function recovery of long-term survivors were 51.7%, 68.6%, 82.0%, and 88.4%, respectively. This case example illustrates a process for formulating and expressing a prognostic assessment for an ICU patient requiring RRT for ARF. Data from the literature review provide baseline information that requires adjustment to reflect specific patient circumstances. The nature of the acute primary process, comorbidities, and severity of illness are key modifiers. Finally, the prognostic assessment is expressed during a family meeting using recommended principles of communication.

Communication practices that encourage and constrain shared decision making in health-care encounters: Systematic review of conversation analytic research.

Science.gov (United States)

Land, Victoria; Parry, Ruth; Seymour, Jane

2017-12-01

Shared decision making (SDM) is generally treated as good practice in health-care interactions. Conversation analytic research has yielded detailed findings about decision making in health-care encounters. To map decision making communication practices relevant to health-care outcomes in face-to-face interactions yielded by prior conversation analyses, and to examine their function in relation to SDM. We searched nine electronic databases (last search November 2016) and our own and other academics' collections. Published conversation analyses (no restriction on publication dates) using recordings of health-care encounters in English where the patient (and/or companion) was present and where the data and analysis focused on health/illness-related decision making. We extracted study characteristics, aims, findings relating to communication practices, how these functioned in relation to SDM, and internal/external validity issues. We synthesised findings aggregatively. Twenty-eight publications met the inclusion criteria. We sorted findings into 13 types of communication practices and organized these in relation to four elements of decision-making sequences: (i) broaching decision making; (ii) putting forward a course of action; (iii) committing or not (to the action put forward); and (iv) HCPs' responses to patients' resistance or withholding of commitment. Patients have limited opportunities to influence decision making. HCPs' practices may constrain or encourage this participation. Patients, companions and HCPs together treat and undertake decision making as shared, though to varying degrees. Even for non-negotiable treatment trajectories, the spirit of SDM can be invoked through practices that encourage participation (eg by bringing the patient towards shared understanding of the decision's rationale). © 2017 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Danish Translation and Cultural Adaption of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) patient version

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Hulbæk, Mette; Jørgensen, Marianne Johansson; Primdahl, Jette

Background and aims Measure instruments that measure the extent to which patients are involved in the process of decision-making are developed and validated and being used worldwide. So far, no validated self-report instrument for the shared decision making (SDM) process is available in Denmark....... The German 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9, patient version) is used to measure the extent to which patients are involved in the process of decision-making. The questionnaire can be used in both research and clinical practice. It can be used when there are several treatment options...... conclusion A forward and backward translation were completed by four different translators and followed by an adjustment made by the expert panel. The expert panel included the three of the four translators, experts in health, instrument development and translation and an expert in the field of gynecology...

The impact of the distance-dependent promotional effect on the promotion cost sharing decision

Science.gov (United States)

Sheen, Gwo-Ji; Wang, Shih-Yen; Yeh, Yingchieh

2016-02-01

This paper considers the promotion cost sharing decision between a supplier and a retailer. The customer demand is affected by both national and local promotional effects while the local promotional effect on a customer is dependent on the distance between the retailer and this customer. We propose a continuous approximation approach to modelling the sum of the customer demand in the whole market area served by the retailer. A model is provided to help managers decide on the retail price, the local advertising expenditure, the national advertising expenditure, and the supplier participation rate, with consideration of the influence of distance on the promotional effect. We also find that the supplier's promotion cost sharing rate increases as the market size increases or the influence of distance on the promotional effect decreases. A numerical example is given to show that the nature of distance-dependent promotional effect has a significant impact on the decisions and profits.

What Factors are Associated with Consumer Initiation of Shared Decision Making in Mental Health Visits?

Science.gov (United States)

Matthias, Marianne S; Fukui, Sadaaki; Salyers, Michelle P

2017-01-01

Understanding consumer initiation of shared decision making (SDM) is critical to improving SDM in mental health consultations, particularly because providers do not always invite consumer participation in treatment decisions. This study examined the association between consumer initiation of nine elements of SDM as measured by the SDM scale, and measures of consumer illness self-management and the consumer-provider relationship. In 63 mental health visits, three SDM elements were associated with self-management or relationship factors: discussion of consumer goals, treatment alternatives, and pros and cons of a decision. Limitations, implications, and future directions are discussed.

Oncology residents' perspectives on communication skills and shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Samant, Rajiv; Aivas, Inge; Bourque, Jean-Marc; Tucker, Tara

2010-12-01

Shared decision making (SDM) and effective communication are essential components of cancer care. Residents in oncology-related specialties were surveyed about communication skills and SDM. The response rate was 77% (17/22), and 93% stated that communication skills were very important for their specialty. Most (76%) thought their communication skills were adequate, but areas of difficulty included discussing end-of-life issues, giving hope when the prognosis was bleak and dealing with hostile patients. Only 58% of respondents had heard the term SDM, and 29% were aware of its meaning. More SDM and communication training are required for future oncology physicians.

What supports do health system organizations have in place to facilitate evidence-informed decision-making? A qualitative study.

Science.gov (United States)

Ellen, Moriah E; Léon, Gregory; Bouchard, Gisèle; Lavis, John N; Ouimet, Mathieu; Grimshaw, Jeremy M

2013-08-06

Decisions regarding health systems are sometimes made without the input of timely and reliable evidence, leading to less than optimal health outcomes. Healthcare organizations can implement tools and infrastructures to support the use of research evidence to inform decision-making. The purpose of this study was to profile the supports and instruments (i.e., programs, interventions, instruments or tools) that healthcare organizations currently have in place and which ones were perceived to facilitate evidence-informed decision-making. In-depth semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with individuals in three different types of positions (i.e., a senior management team member, a library manager, and a 'knowledge broker') in three types of healthcare organizations (i.e., regional health authorities, hospitals and primary care practices) in two Canadian provinces (i.e., Ontario and Quebec). The interviews were taped, transcribed, and then analyzed thematically using NVivo 9 qualitative data analysis software. A total of 57 interviews were conducted in 25 organizations in Ontario and Quebec. The main findings suggest that, for the healthcare organizations that participated in this study, the following supports facilitate evidence-informed decision-making: facilitating roles that actively promote research use within the organization; establishing ties to researchers and opinion leaders outside the organization; a technical infrastructure that provides access to research evidence, such as databases; and provision and participation in training programs to enhance staff's capacity building. This study identified the need for having a receptive climate, which laid the foundation for the implementation of other tangible initiatives and supported the use of research in decision-making. This study adds to the literature on organizational efforts that can increase the use of research evidence in decision-making. Some of the identified supports may increase the use of

Shared Decision Making and Effective Physician-Patient Communication: The Quintessence of Patient-Centered Care

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Huy Ming Lim

2015-03-01

Full Text Available The Institute of Medicine’s (IOM 2001 landmark report, Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century, identified patient-centeredness as one of the fundamental attributes of quality health care, alongside safety, effectiveness, timeliness, efficiency, and equity. The IOM defined patient-centeredness as “providing care that is respectful of and responsive to individual patient preferences, needs, and values and ensuring that patient values guide all clinical decisions.” This concept of patient-centered care represents a paradigm shift from the traditional disease-oriented and physician-centered care, grounding health care in the subjective experience of illness and the needs and preferences of individual patients rather than the evaluation and treatment of diseases which emphasizes on leveraging clinical expertise and evidence derived from population-based studies. Regrettably, despite the ubiquitous talk about patient-centered care in modern health care, shared decision-making and effective physician-patient communication—the two cruxes of patient-centered care—are yet to become the norms. Strategies to promote and enhance shared decision-making and effective communication between clinicians and patients should be rigorously implemented to establish a health care system that truly values patients as individuals and turn the rhetoric of patient-centered care into reality.

Shared decision making in preventive care in Switzerland: From theory to action.

Science.gov (United States)

Selby, Kevin; Auer, Reto; Cornuz, Jacques

2017-06-01

Switzerland with its decentralized, liberal health system and its tradition of direct democracy may be an ideal place for shared decision making (SDM) to take root organically, rather than using top-down regulations seen in other countries. There are now multiple directives and programmes in place to encourage SDM, with the creation of several decision aids and specific training programs in the five Swiss medical schools. There has been an emphasis on preventive care, with the integration of patient preference into an organized colorectal cancer screening program, clear recommendations for prostate cancer screening, and inroads into the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Focusing on the experience of the University of Lausanne, we describe multiple approaches being taken to teaching SDM and the local development of decision aids, drawing on international experience but tailored to local needs. Efforts are being made to further involve patients in not only SDM, but also associated research and quality improvement projects. Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

A Qualitative Analysis of Patients' Perceptions of Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: "Let Me Know I Have a Choice".

Science.gov (United States)

Schoenfeld, Elizabeth M; Goff, Sarah L; Downs, Gwendolyn; Wenger, Robert J; Lindenauer, Peter K; Mazor, Kathleen M

2018-03-25

Despite increasing attention to the use of shared decision making (SDM) in the emergency department (ED), little is known about ED patients' perspectives regarding this practice. We sought to explore the use of SDM from the perspectives of ED patients, focusing on what affects patients' desired level of involvement and what barriers and facilitators patients find most relevant to their experience. We conducted semistructured interviews with a purposive sample of ED patients or their proxies at two sites. An interview guide was developed from existing literature and expert consensus and based on a framework underscoring the importance of both knowledge and power. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed in an iterative process by a three-person coding team. Emergent themes were identified, discussed, and organized. Twenty-nine patients and proxies participated. The mean age of participants was 56 years (range, 20 to 89 years), and 13 were female. Participants were diverse in regard to race/ethnicity, education, number of previous ED visits, and presence of chronic conditions. All participants wanted some degree of involvement in decision making. Participants who made statements suggesting high self-efficacy and those who expressed mistrust of the health care system or previous negative experiences wanted a greater degree of involvement. Facilitators to involvement included familiarity with the decision at hand, physicians' good communication skills, and clearly delineated options. Some participants felt that their own relative lack of knowledge, compared to that of the physicians, made their involvement inappropriate or unwanted. Many participants had no expectation for SDM and although they did want involvement when asked explicitly, they were otherwise likely to defer to physicians without discussion. Many did not recognize opportunities for SDM in their clinical care. This exploration of ED patients' perceptions of SDM suggests that most patients want

The context influences doctors' support of shared decision-making in cancer care.

Science.gov (United States)

Shepherd, H L; Tattersall, M H N; Butow, P N

2007-07-02

Most cancer patients in westernised countries now want all information about their situation, good or bad, and many wish to be involved in decision-making. The attitudes to and use of shared decision-making (SDM) by cancer doctors is not well known. Australian cancer clinicians treating breast, colorectal, gynaecological, haematological, or urological cancer were surveyed to identify their usual approach to decision-making and their comfort with different decision-making styles when discussing treatment with patients. A response rate of 59% resulted in 624 complete surveys, which explored usual practice in discussing participation in decision-making, providing information, and perception of the role patients want to play. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictors of use of SDM. Most cancer doctors (62.4%) reported using SDM and being most comfortable with this approach. Differences were apparent between reported high comfort with SDM and less frequent usual practice. Multivariate analysis showed that specialisation in breast or urological cancers compared to other cancers (AOR 3.02), high caseload of new patients per month (AOR 2.81) and female gender (AOR 1.87) were each independently associated with increased likelihood of use of SDM. Barriers exist to the application of SDM by doctors according to clinical situation and clinician characteristics.

Capturing information needs of care providers to support knowledge sharing and distributed decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Rogers, M; Zach, L; An, Y; Dalrymple, P

2012-01-01

This paper reports on work carried out to elicit information needs at a trans-disciplinary, nurse-managed health care clinic that serves a medically disadvantaged urban population. The trans-disciplinary model provides a "one-stop shop" for patients who can receive a wide range of services beyond traditional primary care. However, this model of health care presents knowledge sharing challenges because little is known about how data collected from the non-traditional services can be integrated into the traditional electronic medical record (EMR) and shared with other care providers. There is also little known about how health information technology (HIT) can be used to support the workflow in such a practice. The objective of this case study was to identify the information needs of care providers in order to inform the design of HIT to support knowledge sharing and distributed decision making. A participatory design approach is presented as a successful technique to specify requirements for HIT applications that can support a trans-disciplinary model of care. Using this design approach, the researchers identified the information needs of care providers working at the clinic and suggested HIT improvements to integrate non-traditional information into the EMR. These modifications allow knowledge sharing among care providers and support better health decisions. We have identified information needs of care providers as they are relevant to the design of health information systems. As new technology is designed and integrated into various workflows it is clear that understanding information needs is crucial to acceptance of that technology.

[Improving shared decision-making for hospital patients: Description and evaluation of a treatment intensity assessment tool].

Science.gov (United States)

Amblàs-Novellas, Jordi; Casas, Sílvia; Catalán, Rosa María; Oriol-Ruscalleda, Margarita; Lucchetti, Gianni Enrico; Quer-Vall, Francesc Xavier

2016-01-01

Shared decision-making between patients and healthcare professionals is crucial to guarantee adequate coherence between patient values and preferences, caring aims and treatment intensity, which is key for the provision of patient-centred healthcare. The assessment of such interventions are essential for caring continuity purposes. To do this, reliable and easy-to-use assessment systems are required. This study describes the results of the implementation of a hospital treatment intensity assessment tool. The pre-implementation and post-implementation results were compared between two cohorts of patients assessed for one month. Some record of care was registered in 6.1% of patients in the pre-implementation group (n=673) compared to 31.6% of patients in the post-implementation group (n=832) (P<.01), with differences between services. Hospital mortality in both cohorts is 1.9%; in the pre-implementation group, 93.75% of deceased patients had treatment intensity assessment. In hospital settings, the availability of a specific tool seems to encourage very significantly shared decision-making processes between patients and healthcare professionals -multiplying by more than 5 times the treatment intensity assessment. Moreover, such tools help in the caring continuity processes between different teams and the personalisation of caring interventions to be monitored. More research is needed to continue improving shared decision-making for hospital patients. Copyright © 2015 SEGG. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.

Investigating a training supporting shared decision making (IT'S SDM 2011: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Geiger Friedemann

2011-10-01

Full Text Available Background Shared Decision Making (SDM is regarded as the best practice model for the communicative challenge of decision making about treatment or diagnostic options. However, randomized controlled trials focusing the effectiveness of SDM trainings are rare and existing measures of SDM are increasingly challenged by the latest research findings. This study will 1 evaluate a new physicians' communication training regarding patient involvement in terms of SDM, 2 validate SDMMASS, a new compound measure of SDM, and 3 evaluate the effects of SDM on the perceived quality of the decision process and on the elaboration of the decision. Methods In a multi-center randomized controlled trial with a waiting control group, 40 physicians from 7 medical fields are enrolled. Each physician contributes a sequence of four medical consultations including a diagnostic or treatment decision. The intervention consists of two condensed video-based individual coaching sessions (15min. supported by a manual and a DVD. The interventions alternate with three measurement points plus follow up (6 months. Realized patient involvement is measured using the coefficient SDMMASS drawn from the Multifocal Approach to the Sharing in SDM (MAPPIN'SDM which includes objective involvement, involvement as perceived by the patient, and the doctor-patient concordance regarding their judges of the involvement. For validation purposes, all three components of SDMMASS are supplemented by similar measures, the OPTION observer scale, the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q and the dyadic application of the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS. Training effects are analyzed using t-tests. Spearman correlation coefficients are used to determine convergent validities, the influence of involvement (SDMMASS on the perceived decision quality (DCS and on the elaboration of the decision. The latter is operationalised by the ELAB coefficient from the UP24 (Uncertainty Profile, 24 items version

Implementation of shared decision-making in oncology: development and pilot study of a nurse-led decision-coaching programme for women with ductal carcinoma in situ.

Science.gov (United States)

Berger-Höger, Birte; Liethmann, Katrin; Mühlhauser, Ingrid; Steckelberg, Anke

2017-12-06

To implement informed shared decision-making (ISDM) in breast care centres, we developed and piloted an inter-professional complex intervention. We developed an intervention consisting of three components: an evidence-based patient decision aid (DA) for women with ductal carcinoma in situ, a decision-coaching led by specialised nurses (breast care nurses and oncology nurses) and structured physician encounters. In order to enable professionals to gain ISDM competencies, we developed and tested a curriculum-based training programme for specialised nurses and a workshop for physicians. After successful testing of the components, we conducted a pilot study to test the feasibility of the entire revised intervention in two breast care centres. Here the acceptance of the intervention by women and professionals, the applicability to the breast care centres' procedures, women's knowledge, patient involvement in treatment decision-making assessed with the MAPPIN'SDM-observer instrument MAPPIN'O dyad, and barriers to and facilitators of the implementation were taken into consideration. We used questionnaires, structured verbal and written feedback and video recordings. Qualitative data were analysed descriptively, and mean values and ranges of quantitative data were calculated. To test the DA, focus groups and individual interviews were conducted with 27 women. Six expert reviews were obtained. The components of the nurse training were tested with 18 specialised nurses and 19 health science students. The development and piloting of the components were successful. The pilot test of the entire intervention included seven patients. In general, the intervention is applicable. Patients attained adequate knowledge (range of correct answers: 9-11 of 11). On average, a basic level of patient involvement in treatment decision-making was observed for nurses and patient-nurse dyads (M(MAPPIN-O dyad ): 2.15 and M(MAPPIN-O nurse ): 1.90). Relevant barriers were identified; physicians

Shared decision-making in neonatology: an utopia or an attainable goal?

Science.gov (United States)

D'Aloja, Ernesto; Floris, Laura; Muller, Mima; Birocchi, Francesca; Fanos, Vassilios; Paribello, Francesco; Demontis, Roberto

2010-10-01

Medical decision making is sometimes considered as a relatively simple process in which a decision may be made by the physician, by the patient, or by both patient and physician working together. There are three main models of decision making--paternalism, patient informed choice, and shared decision-making (SDM), having each one of these drawbacks and limitations. Historically, the most adopted one was the paternalism (strongly 'Doctor knows best'), where the professional made the decision based on what he/she considered to be as the patient's best interest, not necessarily contemplating patient's will and wishes. Currently, at the antipodes, the patient informed choice, where the patient makes his/her decision based on information received from the physician with no possible interference of professional's own preferences, seems to be the preferred relationship standard. SDM represents an intermediate approach between the two above-mentioned opposite models, being a medical process that involves actively the doctor and the patient who both bring their own facts and preferences to reach an agreement on the decision on if, when and how to treat a disease. This model, being characterized by elements pertaining to both the others, is gaining popularity in several medical and surgical scenarios whenever a competent patient is able to actively participate into the decisional process. On this basis can this model be implemented also in a Neonatology Intensive Care Unit where little patients are--by nature--incompetent, being the diagnostic/therapeutic choices taken by parents? We focused on this complex item considering four possible different scenarios and it seems to us that it could be possible to introduce such an approach, providing that parents' empowerment, a good physician's communication skill and consideration of all cultural, religious, economic, and ethic values of every single actor have been fairly taken into account.

A design process for using normative models in shared decision making: a case study in the context of prenatal testing.

Science.gov (United States)

Rapaport, Sivan; Leshno, Moshe; Fink, Lior

2014-12-01

Shared decision making (SDM) encourages the patient to play a more active role in the process of medical consultation and its primary objective is to find the best treatment for a specific patient. Recent findings, however, show that patient preferences cannot be easily or accurately judged on the basis of communicative exchange during routine office visits, even for patients who seek to expand their role in medical decision making (MDM). The objective of this study is to improve the quality of patient-physician communication by developing a novel design process for SDM and then demonstrating, through a case study, the applicability of this process in enabling the use of a normative model for a specific medical situation. Our design process goes through the following stages: definition of medical situation and decision problem, development/identification of normative model, adaptation of normative model, empirical analysis and development of decision support systems (DSS) tools that facilitate the SDM process in the specific medical situation. This study demonstrates the applicability of the process through the implementation of the general normative theory of MDM under uncertainty for the medical-financial dilemma of choosing a physician to perform amniocentesis. The use of normative models in SDM raises several issues, such as the goal of the normative model, the relation between the goals of prediction and recommendation, and the general question of whether it is valid to use a normative model for people who do not behave according to the model's assumptions. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Realigning Shared Governance With Magnet® and the Organization's Operating System to Achieve Clinical Excellence.

Science.gov (United States)

Moreno, Janette V; Girard, Anita S; Foad, Wendy

2018-03-01

In 2012, an academic medical center successfully overhauled a 15-year-old shared governance to align 6 house-wide and 30 unit-based councils with the new Magnet Recognition Program® and the organization's operating system, using the processes of LEAN methodology. The redesign improved cross-council communication structures, facilitated effective shared decision-making processes, increased staff engagement, and improved clinical outcomes. The innovative structural and process elements of the new model are replicable in other health institutions.

Competence to Complete Psychiatric Advance Directives: Effects of Facilitated Decision Making

Science.gov (United States)

Swanson, Jeffrey W.; Appelbaum, Paul S.; Swartz, Marvin S.; Ferron, Joelle; Van Dorn, Richard A.; Wagner, H. Ryan

2013-01-01

Psychiatric advance directives (PADs) statutes presume competence to complete these documents, but the range and dimensions of decisional competence among people who actually complete PADs is unknown. This study examines clinical and neuropsychological correlates of performance on a measure to assess competence to complete PADs and investigates the effects of a facilitated PAD intervention on decisional capacity. N = 469 adults with psychotic disorders were interviewed at baseline and then randomly assigned to either a control group in which they received written materials about PADs or to an intervention group in which they were offered an opportunity to meet individually with a trained facilitator to create a PAD. At baseline, domains on the Decisional Competence Assessment Tool for PADs (DCAT-PAD) were most strongly associated with IQ, verbal memory, abstract thinking, and psychiatric symptoms. At one-month follow-up, participants in the intervention group showed more improvement on the DCAT-PAD than controls, particularly among participants with pre-morbid IQ estimates below the median of 100. The results suggest that PAD facilitation is an effective method to boost competence of cognitively-impaired clients to write PADs and make treatment decisions within PADs, thereby maximizing the chances their advance directives will be valid. PMID:17294136

Putting informed and shared decision making into practice.

Science.gov (United States)

Towle, Angela; Godolphin, William; Grams, Garry; Lamarre, Amanda

2006-12-01

To investigate the practice, experiences and views of motivated and trained family physicians as they attempt to implement informed and shared decision making (ISDM) in routine practice and to identify and understand the barriers they encounter. Patient involvement in decision making about their health care has been the focus of much academic activity. Although significant conceptual and experimental work has been done, ISDM rarely occurs. Physician attitudes and lack of training are identified barriers. Qualitative analysis of transcripts of consultations and key informant group interviews. Six family physicians received training in the ISDM competencies. Audiotapes of office consultations were made before and after training. Transcripts of consultations were examined to identify behavioural markers associated with each competency and the range of expression of the competencies. The physicians attended group interviews at the end of the study to explore experiences of ISDM. The physicians liked the ISDM model and thought that they should put it into practice. Evidence from transcripts indicated they were able to elicit concerns, ideas and expectations (although not about management) and agree an action plan. They did not elicit preferences for role or information. They sometimes offered choices. They had difficulty achieving full expression of any of the competencies and integrating ISDM into their script for the medical interview. The study also identified a variety of competency-specific barriers. A major barrier to the practice of ISDM by motivated physicians appears to be the need to change well-established patterns of communication with patients.

Informed Consent Obtainment, Malpractice Litigation, and the Potential Role of Shared Decision Making Approaches

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Birkeland, Søren

2015-01-01

of the iceberg as lack of patient ‘ownership’ of the DM is not always exposed or may be explicated otherwise (alleged substandard behavior or surgery etc). SDM approaches possibly may sometimes prevent IC duty breaches, assist documenting the DM process, and reduce litigation occurrence.......Internationally, there is increasing recognition of Shared Decision Making (SDM) and Decision Aids (DAs) as measures to increase patient involvement in – and satisfaction with - decision making (DM), improve health care communication, and address bioethical autonomy principles and informed consent...... search term ‘consent’; 15th May 2015). Among 3291 lawsuits, 229 with explicit IC judgments were found. They mostly concerned the hospital sector (179; 78%) and commonly involved surgery (69), gyn/obstetrics (33), and gen. medicine (20; incl, eg, cardiology). 21 affected minor patients and 36 were cancer...

Is Shared Decision Making for End-of-Life Decisions Associated With Better Outcomes as Compared to Other Forms of Decision Making? A Systematic Literature Review

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Negin Hajizadeh MD, MPH

2016-07-01

Full Text Available Background: Whether shared decision making (SDM has been evaluated for end-of-life (EOL decisions as compared to other forms of decision making has not been studied. Purpose: To summarize the evidence on SDM being associated with better outcomes for EOL decision making, as compared to other forms of decision making. Data Sources: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases were searched through April 2014. Study Selection: Studies were selected that evaluated SDM, compared to any other decision making style, for an EOL decision. Data Extraction: Components of SDM tested, comparators to SDM, EOL decision being assessed, and outcomes measured. Data Synthesis: Seven studies met the inclusion criteria (three experimental and four observational studies. Results were analyzed using narrative synthesis. All three experimental studies compared SDM interventions to usual care. The four observational studies compared SDM to doctor-controlled decision making, or reported the correlation between level of SDM and outcomes. Components of SDM specified in each study differed widely, but the component most frequently included was presenting information on the risks/benefits of treatment choices (five of seven studies. The outcome most frequently measured was communication, although with different measurement tools. Other outcomes included decisional conflict, trust, satisfaction, and “quality of dying.” Limitations: We could not analyze the strength of evidence for a given outcome due to heterogeneity in the outcomes reported and measurement tools. Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence supporting SDM being associated with improved outcomes for EOL decisions as opposed to other forms of decision making. Future studies should describe which components of SDM are being tested, outline the comparator decision making style, and use validated tools to measure outcomes.

Shared decision making for prostate cancer screening: the results of a combined analysis of two practice-based randomized controlled trials.

Science.gov (United States)

Sheridan, Stacey L; Golin, Carol; Bunton, Audrina; Lykes, John B; Schwartz, Bob; McCormack, Lauren; Driscoll, David; Bangdiwala, Shrikant I; Harris, Russell P

2012-11-13

Professional societies recommend shared decision making (SDM) for prostate cancer screening, however, most efforts have promoted informed rather than shared decision making. The objective of this study is to 1) examine the effects of a prostate cancer screening intervention to promote SDM and 2) determine whether framing prostate information in the context of other clearly beneficial men's health services affects decisions. We conducted two separate randomized controlled trials of the same prostate cancer intervention (with or without additional information on more clearly beneficial men's health services). For each trial, we enrolled a convenience sample of 2 internal medicine practices, and their interested physicians and male patients with no prior history of prostate cancer (for a total of 4 practices, 28 physicians, and 128 men across trials). Within each practice site, we randomized men to either 1) a video-based decision aid and researcher-led coaching session or 2) a highway safety video. Physicians at each site received a 1-hour educational session on prostate cancer and SDM. To assess intervention effects, we measured key components of SDM, intent to be screened, and actual screening. After finding that results did not vary by trial, we combined data across sites, adjusting for the random effects of both practice and physician. Compared to an attention control, our prostate cancer screening intervention increased men's perceptions that screening is a decision (absolute difference +41%; 95% CI 25 to 57%) and men's knowledge about prostate cancer screening (absolute difference +34%; 95% CI 19% to 50%), but had no effect on men's self-reported participation in shared decisions or their participation at their preferred level. Overall, the intervention decreased screening intent (absolute difference -34%; 95% CI -50% to -18%) and actual screening rates (absolute difference -22%; 95% CI -38 to -7%) with no difference in effect by frame. SDM interventions can

Inconsistencies in patient perceptions and observer ratings of shared decision making: the case of colorectal cancer screening.

Science.gov (United States)

Wunderlich, Tracy; Cooper, Gregory; Divine, George; Flocke, Susan; Oja-Tebbe, Nancy; Stange, Kurt; Lafata, Jennifer Elston

2010-09-01

To compare patient-reported and observer-rated shared decision making (SDM) use for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and evaluate patient, physician and patient-reported relational communication factors associated with patient-reported use of shared CRC screening decisions. Study physicians are salaried primary care providers. Patients are insured, aged 50-80 and due for CRC screening. Audio-recordings from 363 primary care visits were observer-coded for elements of SDM. A post-visit patient survey assessed patient-reported decision-making processes and relational communication during visit. Association of patient-reported SDM with observer-rated elements of SDM, as well as patient, physician and relational communication factors were evaluated using generalized estimating equations. 70% of patients preferred SDM for preventive health decisions, 47% of patients reported use of a SDM process, and only one of the screening discussions included all four elements of SDM per observer ratings. Patient report of SDM use was not associated with observer-rated elements of SDM, but was significantly associated with female physician gender and patient-reported relational communication. Inconsistencies exist between patient reports and observer ratings of SDM for CRC screening. Future studies are needed to understand whether SDM that is patient-reported, observer-rated or both are associated with informed and value-concordant CRC screening decisions. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Barriers and Promoters to Participation in the Era of Shared Treatment Decision-Making.

Science.gov (United States)

McCarter, Sarah P; Tariman, Joseph D; Spawn, Nadia; Mehmeti, Enisa; Bishop-Royse, Jessica; Garcia, Ima; Hartle, Lisa; Szubski, Katharine

2016-10-01

This study aimed to identify the barriers and promoters for participation in cancer treatment decision in the era of shared decision-making (SDM) process. A qualitative design was utilized. Nineteen nurses and 11 nurse practitioners from oncology inpatient and outpatient settings participated in semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis. The findings include practice barrier, patient barrier, institutional policy barrier, professional barrier, scope of practice barrier, insurance coverage barrier, and administrative barrier. Multidisciplinary team approach, having a nursing voice during SDM, high level of knowledge of the disease and treatment, and personal valuation of SDM participation were perceived as promoters. Oncology nurses and nurse practitioners face many barriers to their participation during SDM. Organizational support and system-wide culture of SDM are essential to achieve better cancer treatment decisions outcome. Additional studies are needed to determine the factors that can promote more participation among nurses and nurse practitioners. © The Author(s) 2016.

Improving shared decision-making in chronic lymphocytic leukemia through multidisciplinary education.

Science.gov (United States)

Rocque, Gabrielle B; Williams, Courtney P; Halilova, Karina I; Borate, Uma; Jackson, Bradford E; Van Laar, Emily S; Pisu, Maria; Butler, Thomas W; Davis, Randall S; Mehta, Amitkumar; Knight, Sara J; Safford, Monika M

2018-03-01

New treatments for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with excellent response rates and varying toxicity profiles have emerged in recent years, creating an opportunity for a patient's personal preferences to contribute to treatment decisions. We conducted a prospective, quasi-experimental pre- and post-evaluation of a multilevel educational program and its impact on knowledge of CLL and shared decision-making (SDM). We educated patients, lay navigators, nurses/advanced practice providers (APPs), and physicians. Patients were evaluated for change in patient activation, distress, desired role in decision-making, perception of decision-making, satisfaction with oncologist explanation of treatment choice, and knowledge of CLL. Lay navigators, nurses/APPs, and physicians were evaluated for change in CLL knowledge and perception of decision-making. Forty-four patients, 33 lay navigators, 27 nurses/APPs, and 27 physicians participated in the educational program. We observed trends toward improved patient activation, with 68% before education versus 76% after education reporting a Patient Activation Measure (PAM) score of 3 or 4. The percentage of patients desiring and perceiving SDM trended upward from 47% to 67% and from 35% to 49%, respectively. The percentage of patients understanding that CLL is incurable increased from 80% to 90%, as did reporting awareness of signs of progression (64% to 76%). Patients' satisfaction with their oncologists' explanations of therapy increased significantly from 83% to 95% (p = .03). CLL knowledge increased after education for lay navigators (36% vs 63%) and nurses/APPs (35% vs 69%), and remained high for physicians (85% vs 87%). Nurses/APPs and physicians perceived at least some patient involvement in decision-making at baseline, whereas 12% of patients and 23% of lay navigators perceived that physicians made decisions independently. This project demonstrated trends toward improvements in patient engagement, prognostic awareness

Supportive Care: Communication Strategies to Improve Cultural Competence in Shared Decision Making.

Science.gov (United States)

Brown, Edwina A; Bekker, Hilary L; Davison, Sara N; Koffman, Jonathan; Schell, Jane O

2016-10-07

Historic migration and the ever-increasing current migration into Western countries have greatly changed the ethnic and cultural patterns of patient populations. Because health care beliefs of minority groups may follow their religion and country of origin, inevitable conflict can arise with decision making at the end of life. The principles of truth telling and patient autonomy are embedded in the framework of Anglo-American medical ethics. In contrast, in many parts of the world, the cultural norm is protection of the patient from the truth, decision making by the family, and a tradition of familial piety, where it is dishonorable not to do as much as possible for parents. The challenge for health care professionals is to understand how culture has enormous potential to influence patients' responses to medical issues, such as healing and suffering, as well as the physician-patient relationship. Our paper provides a framework of communication strategies that enhance crosscultural competency within nephrology teams. Shared decision making also enables clinicians to be culturally competent communicators by providing a model where clinicians and patients jointly consider best clinical evidence in light of a patient's specific health characteristics and values when choosing health care. The development of decision aids to include cultural awareness could avoid conflict proactively, more productively address it when it occurs, and enable decision making within the framework of the patient and family cultural beliefs. Copyright © 2016 by the American Society of Nephrology.

Supporting shared decision making using an Option Grid for osteoarthritis of the knee in an interface musculoskeletal clinic: A stepped wedge trial.

Science.gov (United States)

Elwyn, Glyn; Pickles, Tim; Edwards, Adrian; Kinsey, Katharine; Brain, Kate; Newcombe, Robert G; Firth, Jill; Marrin, Katy; Nye, Alan; Wood, Fiona

2016-04-01

To evaluate whether introducing tools, specifically designed for use in clinical encounters, namely Option Grids, into a clinical practice setting leads to higher levels of shared decision making. A stepped wedge trial design where 6 physiotherapists at an interface clinic in Oldham, UK, were sequentially instructed in how to use an Option Grid for osteoarthritis of the knee. Patients with suspected or confirmed osteoarthritis of the knee were recruited, six per clinician prior to instruction, and six per clinician afterwards. We measured shared decision making, patient knowledge, and readiness to decide. A total of 72 patients were recruited; 36 were allocated to the intervention group. There was an 8.4 point (95% CI 4.4 to 12.2) increase in the Observer OPTION score (range 0-100) in the intervention group. The mean gain in knowledge was 0.9 points (score range 0-5, 95% CI, 0.3 to 1.5). There was no increase in encounter duration. Shared decision making increased when clinicians used the knee osteoarthritis Option Grid. Tools designed to support collaboration and deliberation about treatment options lead to increased levels of shared decision making. Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Interspecific shared collective decision-making in two forensically important species.

Science.gov (United States)

Boulay, Julien; Deneubourg, Jean-Louis; Hédouin, Valéry; Charabidzé, Damien

2016-02-10

To date, the study of collective behaviour has mainly focused on intraspecific situations: the collective decision-making of mixed-species groups involving interspecific aggregation-segregation has received little attention. Here, we show that, in both conspecific and heterospecific groups, the larvae of two species (Lucilia sericata and Calliphora vomitoria, calliphorid carrion-feeding flies) were able to make a collective choice. In all groups, the choice was made within a few minutes and persisted throughout the period of the experiment. The monitoring of a focal individual within a group showed that these aggregations were governed by attractive and retentive effects of the group. Furthermore, the similarity observed between the conspecific and heterospecific groups suggested the existence of shared aggregation signals. The group size was found to have a stronger influence than the species of necrophagous larvae. These results should be viewed in relation to the well-known correlation between group size and heat generation. This study provides the first experimental examination of the dynamics of collective decision-making in mixed-species groups of invertebrates, contributing to our understanding of the cooperation-competition phenomenon in animal social groups. © 2016 The Author(s).

Putting informed and shared decision making into practice

Science.gov (United States)

Towle, Angela; Godolphin, William; Grams, Garry; LaMarre, Amanda

2006-01-01

Abstract Objective  To investigate the practice, experiences and views of motivated and trained family physicians as they attempt to implement informed and shared decision making (ISDM) in routine practice and to identify and understand the barriers they encounter. Background  Patient involvement in decision making about their health care has been the focus of much academic activity. Although significant conceptual and experimental work has been done, ISDM rarely occurs. Physician attitudes and lack of training are identified barriers. Design  Qualitative analysis of transcripts of consultations and key informant group interviews. Settings and participants  Six family physicians received training in the ISDM competencies. Audiotapes of office consultations were made before and after training. Transcripts of consultations were examined to identify behavioural markers associated with each competency and the range of expression of the competencies. The physicians attended group interviews at the end of the study to explore experiences of ISDM. Results  The physicians liked the ISDM model and thought that they should put it into practice. Evidence from transcripts indicated they were able to elicit concerns, ideas and expectations (although not about management) and agree an action plan. They did not elicit preferences for role or information. They sometimes offered choices. They had difficulty achieving full expression of any of the competencies and integrating ISDM into their script for the medical interview. The study also identified a variety of competency‐specific barriers. Conclusion  A major barrier to the practice of ISDM by motivated physicians appears to be the need to change well‐established patterns of communication with patients. PMID:17083559

Views of general practice staff about the use of a patient-oriented treatment decision aid in shared decision making for patients with type 2 diabetes: A mixed-methods study.

Science.gov (United States)

Wildeboer, Anita; du Pon, Esther; Schuling, Jan; Haaijer-Ruskamp, Flora M; Denig, Petra

2018-02-01

Decision aids can be used to support shared decision making (SDM). A patient-oriented treatment decision aid (DA) was developed for type 2 diabetes but its use by general practice staff appeared to be limited. To explore views of practice staff towards SDM and the DA. A mixed-methods study within the Dutch PORTDA-diab trial. Included were 17 practices with staff members who were responsible for routine diabetes care and had worked with the DA, and 209 of their patients. Interviews were conducted focusing on applicability, usefulness and feasibility of the DA. Interviews were tape-recorded, transcribed verbatim and subjected to content analysis for identifying and classifying views. Patient-reported data about the use of the DA were collected. Associations between specific views and use of the DA were tested using Pearson point-biserial correlation. The majority of practice staff expressed positive views towards SDM, which was associated with making more use of the DA. Most of the staff expressed that the DA stimulated a two-way conversation. By using the DA, several became aware of their paternalistic approach. Some staff experienced a conflict with the content of the DA, which was associated with making less use of the DA. The DA was considered useful by practice staff to support SDM. A positive view towards SDM was a facilitator, whereas experiencing a conflict with the content of the DA was a barrier for making use of the DA. © 2017 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Sharing the Burden? Assessing the Lithuanian Decision to Establish a Provincial Reconstruction Team in Afghanistan

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Maskaliūnaitė Asta

2014-12-01

Full Text Available The paper assesses theories explaining the states’ burden-sharing decisions in an alliance and uses them to evaluate the Lithuanian decision to establish a Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT in Afghanistan. In the literature, several influences on such decision-making are identified. These fall into two broad categories of systemic and domestic factors. From the former, threat perception, alliance dependence, systemic pressures of alliance politics are analysed; and from the latter three clusters of aspects such as: state autonomy, elite consensus, space of manoeuver of the executive; bureaucratic politics and organizational interests, and third, some additional elements of strategic culture/state identity. While most factors have some explanatory value, the analysis invites the conclusion that in case of the decision to lead a PRT, the two most important elements were alliance dependence from the first cluster and strategic culture and bureaucratic politics from the second.

Facilitating participatory multilevel decision-making by using interactive mental maps

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Constanze Pfeiffer

2008-11-01

Full Text Available Participation of citizens in political, economic or social decisions is increasingly recognized as a precondition to foster sustainable development processes. Since spatial information is often important during planning and decisionmaking, participatory mapping gains in popularity. However, little attention has been paid to the fact that information must be presented in a useful way to reach city planners and policy makers. Above all, the importance of visualisation tools to support collaboration, analytical reasoning, problem solving and decision-making in analysing and planning processes has been underestimated. In this paper, we describe how an interactive mental map tool has been developed in a highly interdisciplinary disaster management project in Chennai, India. We moved from a hand drawn mental maps approach to an interactive mental map tool. This was achieved by merging socio-economic and geospatial data on infrastructure, local perceptions, coping and adaptation strategies with remote sensing data and modern technology of map making. This newly developed interactive mapping tool allowed for insights into different locally-constructed realities and facilitated the communication of results to the wider public and respective policy makers. It proved to be useful in visualising information and promoting participatory decision-making processes. We argue that the tool bears potential also for health research projects. The interactive mental map can be used to spatially and temporally assess key health themes such as availability of, and accessibility to, existing health care services, breeding sites of disease vectors, collection and storage of water, waste disposal, location of public toilets or defecation sites.

The neglected topic: presentation of cost information in patient decision AIDS.

Science.gov (United States)

Blumenthal-Barby, J S; Robinson, Emily; Cantor, Scott B; Naik, Aanand D; Russell, Heidi Voelker; Volk, Robert J

2015-05-01

Costs are an important component of patients' decision making, but a comparatively underemphasized aspect of formal shared decision making. We hypothesized that decision aids also avoid discussion of costs, despite their being tools designed to facilitate shared decision making about patient-centered outcomes. We sought to define the frequency of cost-related information and identify the common modes of presenting cost and cost-related information in the 290 decision aids catalogued in the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute's Decision Aid Library Inventory (DALI) system. We found that 56% (n = 161) of the decision aids mentioned cost in some way, but only 13% (n = 37) gave a specific price or range of prices. We identified 9 different ways in which cost was mentioned. The most common approach was as a "pro" of one of the treatment options (e.g., "you avoid the cost of medication"). Of the 37 decision aids that gave specific prices or ranges of prices for treatment options, only 2 were about surgery decisions despite the fact that surgery decision aids were the most common. Our findings suggest that presentation of cost information in decision aids is highly variable. Evidence-based guidelines should be developed by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration. © The Author(s) 2015.

The RISAP-study: a complex intervention in risk communication and shared decision-making in general practice

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Kirkegaard, Pia; Edwards, Adrian G K; Hansen, Bo

2010-01-01

decision satisfaction (Provider Decision Process Assessment Instrument). The patients will receive a questionnaire at baseline and after 3 and 6 months. It includes questions about adherence to chosen treatment (Morisky Compliance Scale), self-rated health (SF-12), enablement (Patient Enablement Instrument...... training are needed. Aim:1) to systematically develop, describe and evaluate a complex intervention comprising a training programme for GPs in risk communication and shared decision-making, 2) to evaluate the effect of the training programme on real-life consultations between GPs and patients with high......), and risk communication and decision-making effectiveness (COMRADE Scale). Prescriptions, contacts to the health services, and cholesterol level will be drawn from the registers.In each group, 12 consultations will be observed and tape-recorded. The patients from these 24 consultations will be interviewed...

The quality of instruments to assess the process of shared decision making: A systematic review

Science.gov (United States)

Bomhof-Roordink, Hanna; Smith, Ian P.; Scholl, Isabelle; Stiggelbout, Anne M.; Pieterse, Arwen H.

2018-01-01

Objective To inventory instruments assessing the process of shared decision making and appraise their measurement quality, taking into account the methodological quality of their validation studies. Methods In a systematic review we searched seven databases (PubMed, Embase, Emcare, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Academic Search Premier) for studies investigating instruments measuring the process of shared decision making. Per identified instrument, we assessed the level of evidence separately for 10 measurement properties following a three-step procedure: 1) appraisal of the methodological quality using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist, 2) appraisal of the psychometric quality of the measurement property using three possible quality scores, 3) best-evidence synthesis based on the number of studies, their methodological and psychometrical quality, and the direction and consistency of the results. The study protocol was registered at PROSPERO: CRD42015023397. Results We included 51 articles describing the development and/or evaluation of 40 shared decision-making process instruments: 16 patient questionnaires, 4 provider questionnaires, 18 coding schemes and 2 instruments measuring multiple perspectives. There is an overall lack of evidence for their measurement quality, either because validation is missing or methods are poor. The best-evidence synthesis indicated positive results for a major part of instruments for content validity (50%) and structural validity (53%) if these were evaluated, but negative results for a major part of instruments when inter-rater reliability (47%) and hypotheses testing (59%) were evaluated. Conclusions Due to the lack of evidence on measurement quality, the choice for the most appropriate instrument can best be based on the instrument’s content and characteristics such as the perspective that they assess. We recommend refinement and validation of

Designing an implementation strategy to improve interprofessional shared decision making in sciatica: study protocol of the DISC study

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Hofstede Stefanie N

2012-06-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background Sciatica is a common condition worldwide that is characterized by radiating leg pain and regularly caused by a herniated disc with nerve root compression. Sciatica patients with persisting leg pain after six to eight weeks were found to have similar clinical outcomes and associated costs after prolonged conservative treatment or surgery at one year follow-up. Guidelines recommend that the team of professionals involved in sciatica care and patients jointly decide about treatment options, so-called interprofessional shared decision making (SDM. However, there are strong indications that SDM for sciatica patients is not integrated in daily practice. We designed a study aiming to explore the barriers and facilitators associated with the everyday embedding of SDM for sciatica patients. All related relevant professionals and patients are involved to develop a tailored strategy to implement SDM for sciatica patients. Methods The study consists of two phases: identification of barriers and facilitators and development of an implementation strategy. First, barriers and facilitators are explored using semi-structured interviews among eight professionals of each (paramedical discipline involved in sciatica care (general practitioners, physical therapists, neurologists, neurosurgeons, and orthopedic surgeons. In addition, three focus groups will be conducted among patients. Second, the identified barriers and facilitators will be ranked using a questionnaire among a representative Dutch sample of 200 GPs, 200 physical therapists, 200 neurologists, all 124 neurosurgeons, 200 orthopedic surgeons, and 100 patients. A tailored team-based implementation strategy will be developed based on the results of the first phase using the principles of intervention mapping and an expert panel. Discussion Little is known about effective strategies to increase the uptake of SDM. Most implementation strategies only target a single discipline, whereas

Most Important Factors for the Implementation of Shared Decision Making in Sciatica Care: Ranking among Professionals and Patients

Science.gov (United States)

Hofstede, Stefanie N.; van Bodegom-Vos, Leti; Wentink, Manon M.; Vleggeert-Lankamp, Carmen L. A.; Vliet Vlieland, Thea P. M.; de Mheen, Perla J. Marang-van

2014-01-01

Introduction Due to the increasing specialization of medical professionals, patients are treated by multiple disciplines. To ensure that delivered care is patient-centered, it is crucial that professionals and the patient together decide on treatment (shared decision making (SDM)). However, it is not known how SDM should be integrated in multidisciplinary practice. This study determines the most important factors for SDM implementation in sciatica care, as it is known that a prior inventory of factors is crucial to develop a successful implementation strategy. Methods 246 professionals (general practitioners, physical therapists, neurologists, neurosurgeons, orthopedic surgeons) (30% response) and 155 patients (96% response) responded to an internet-based survey. Respondents ranked barriers and facilitators identified in previous interviews, on their importance using Maximum Difference Scaling. Feeding back the personal top 5 most important factors, each respondent indicated whether these factors were barriers or facilitators. Hierarchical Bayes estimation was used to estimate the relative importance (RI) of each factor. Results Professionals assigned the highest importance to: quality of professional-patient relationship (RI 4.87; CI 4.75–4.99); importance of quick recovery of patient (RI 4.83; CI 4.69–4.97); and knowledge about treatment options (RI 6.64; CI 4.53–4.74), which were reported as barrier and facilitator. Professionals working in primary care had a different ranking than those working in hospital care. Patients assigned the highest importance to: correct diagnosis by professionals (barrier, RI 8.19; CI 7.99–8.38); information provision about treatment options and potential harm and benefits (RI 7.87; CI 7.65–8.08); and explanation of the professional about the care trajectory (RI 7.16; CI 6.94–7.38), which were reported as barrier and facilitator. Conclusions Knowledge, information provision and a good relationship are the most important

Designing an implementation strategy to improve interprofessional shared decision making in sciatica: study protocol of the DISC study.

Science.gov (United States)

Hofstede, Stefanie N; Marang-van de Mheen, Perla J; Assendelft, Willem J J; Vleggeert-Lankamp, Carmen L A; Stiggelbout, Anne M; Vroomen, Patrick C A J; van den Hout, Wilbert B; Vliet Vlieland, Thea P M; van Bodegom-Vos, Leti

2012-06-15

Sciatica is a common condition worldwide that is characterized by radiating leg pain and regularly caused by a herniated disc with nerve root compression. Sciatica patients with persisting leg pain after six to eight weeks were found to have similar clinical outcomes and associated costs after prolonged conservative treatment or surgery at one year follow-up. Guidelines recommend that the team of professionals involved in sciatica care and patients jointly decide about treatment options, so-called interprofessional shared decision making (SDM). However, there are strong indications that SDM for sciatica patients is not integrated in daily practice. We designed a study aiming to explore the barriers and facilitators associated with the everyday embedding of SDM for sciatica patients. All related relevant professionals and patients are involved to develop a tailored strategy to implement SDM for sciatica patients. The study consists of two phases: identification of barriers and facilitators and development of an implementation strategy. First, barriers and facilitators are explored using semi-structured interviews among eight professionals of each (para)medical discipline involved in sciatica care (general practitioners, physical therapists, neurologists, neurosurgeons, and orthopedic surgeons). In addition, three focus groups will be conducted among patients. Second, the identified barriers and facilitators will be ranked using a questionnaire among a representative Dutch sample of 200 GPs, 200 physical therapists, 200 neurologists, all 124 neurosurgeons, 200 orthopedic surgeons, and 100 patients. A tailored team-based implementation strategy will be developed based on the results of the first phase using the principles of intervention mapping and an expert panel. Little is known about effective strategies to increase the uptake of SDM. Most implementation strategies only target a single discipline, whereas multiple disciplines are involved in SDM among sciatica

Shared decision making, a buzz-word in the Netherlands, the pace quickens towards nationwide implementation….

Science.gov (United States)

van der Weijden, Trudy; Post, Heleen; Brand, Paul L P; van Veenendaal, Haske; Drenthen, Ton; van Mierlo, Linda Aj; Stalmeier, Peep; Damman, Olga C; Stiggelbout, Anne

2017-06-01

Currently, shared decision making (SDM) is on the agenda among target patient representative groups, policy makers and professional bodies. Although the International Conference for Shared Decision Making (ISDM) 2011 generated a positive boost, hesitation was also felt among Dutch clinicians, who are challenged by many new tasks. No hesitation is seen among the majority of patients, opting mostly for the SDM model. We haven't reached these patients' needs fully yet, given disappointing research data on patients' experiences and professional behaviour. There is plenty of room for improvement in daily practice, for which many best practices are being designed and increasingly implemented, such as national campaigns to empower patients, central governance of patient decision aids that are developed along clinical practice guidelines, postgraduate training, collaborative learning and system changes, and merging goal setting and SDM in complex care. This is explicitly supported by the Dutch government, the Ministry of Health, patient groups, professional bodies and health insurers. The culture shift in the minds and hearts of patients and clinicians has started but is still ongoing. Enthusiasm for this way of working could be undermined if SDM is defined and implemented in a simplistic, dogmatic manner leading to irresponsible transferring of the professionals' uncertainty, responsibility, and decisional stress to patients. Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

Shared decision making for prostate cancer screening: the results of a combined analysis of two practice-based randomized controlled trials

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Sheridan Stacey L

2012-11-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background Professional societies recommend shared decision making (SDM for prostate cancer screening, however, most efforts have promoted informed rather than shared decision making. The objective of this study is to 1 examine the effects of a prostate cancer screening intervention to promote SDM and 2 determine whether framing prostate information in the context of other clearly beneficial men’s health services affects decisions. Methods We conducted two separate randomized controlled trials of the same prostate cancer intervention (with or without additional information on more clearly beneficial men’s health services. For each trial, we enrolled a convenience sample of 2 internal medicine practices, and their interested physicians and male patients with no prior history of prostate cancer (for a total of 4 practices, 28 physicians, and 128 men across trials. Within each practice site, we randomized men to either 1 a video-based decision aid and researcher-led coaching session or 2 a highway safety video. Physicians at each site received a 1-hour educational session on prostate cancer and SDM. To assess intervention effects, we measured key components of SDM, intent to be screened, and actual screening. After finding that results did not vary by trial, we combined data across sites, adjusting for the random effects of both practice and physician. Results Compared to an attention control, our prostate cancer screening intervention increased men’s perceptions that screening is a decision (absolute difference +41%; 95% CI 25 to 57% and men’s knowledge about prostate cancer screening (absolute difference +34%; 95% CI 19% to 50%, but had no effect on men’s self-reported participation in shared decisions or their participation at their preferred level. Overall, the intervention decreased screening intent (absolute difference −34%; 95% CI −50% to −18% and actual screening rates (absolute difference −22%; 95% CI −38 to �

A Model of Organizational Context and Shared Decision Making: Application to LGBT Racial and Ethnic Minority Patients.

Science.gov (United States)

DeMeester, Rachel H; Lopez, Fanny Y; Moore, Jennifer E; Cook, Scott C; Chin, Marshall H

2016-06-01

Shared decision making (SDM) occurs when patients and clinicians work together to reach care decisions that are both medically sound and responsive to patients' preferences and values. SDM is an important tenet of patient-centered care that can improve patient outcomes. Patients with multiple minority identities, such as sexual orientation and race/ethnicity, are at particular risk for poor SDM. Among these dual-minority patients, added challenges to clear and open communication include cultural barriers, distrust, and a health care provider's lack of awareness of the patient's minority sexual orientation or gender identity. However, organizational factors like a culture of inclusion and private space throughout the visit can improve SDM with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender ("LGBT") racial/ethnic minority patients who have faced stigma and discrimination. Most models of shared decision making focus on the patient-provider interaction, but the health care organization's context is also critical. Context-an organization's structure and operations-can strongly influence the ability and willingness of patients and clinicians to engage in shared decision making. SDM is most likely to be optimal if organizations transform their contexts and patients and providers improve their communication. Thus, we propose a conceptual model that suggests ways in which organizations can shape their contextual structure and operations to support SDM. The model contains six drivers: workflows, health information technology, organizational structure and culture, resources and clinic environment, training and education, and incentives and disincentives. These drivers work through four mechanisms to impact care: continuity and coordination, the ease of SDM, knowledge and skills, and attitudes and beliefs. These mechanisms can activate clinicians and patients to engage in high-quality SDM. We provide examples of how specific contextual changes could make SDM more effective for LGBT

Do interventions designed to support shared decision-making reduce health inequalities? A systematic review and meta-analysis

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Durand, M.A.; Carpenter, L.; Dolan, H.; Bravo, P.; Mann, M.; Bunn, F.; Elwyn, G.

2014-01-01

BACKGROUND: Increasing patient engagement in healthcare has become a health policy priority. However, there has been concern that promoting supported shared decision-making could increase health inequalities. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of SDM interventions on disadvantaged groups and health

Shared Decision Making in the Care of Children with Developmental and Behavioral Disorders.

Science.gov (United States)

Lipstein, Ellen A; Lindly, Olivia J; Anixt, Julia S; Britto, Maria T; Zuckerman, Katharine E

2016-03-01

Shared decision making (SDM) is most needed when there are multiple treatment options and no "right" choice. As with quality and experience of care, frequency of SDM may vary by health condition. The objectives of this study were (1) to compare parent report of SDM between a physical and a behavioral health condition and; (2) to compare parent report of SDM between two different behavioral health conditions. Data on children age 3-17 years with asthma, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and/or autism spectrum disorder (ASD) were drawn from the 2009/10 National Survey of Children with Special Health Care Needs. Weighted logistic regression was used to compare a parent-reported, composite measure of SDM. Analyses controlled for sociodemographic factors that may influence experience of SDM. Compared to parents of children with asthma, parents of children with ADHD were significantly less likely to report experiencing consistent SDM (AOR 0.73). Compared to parents of children with ADHD, those of children with ASD had significantly lower odds of experiencing consistent SDM (AOR 0.59). Those with both ADHD and ASD had the same odds as those with ASD alone of experiencing consistent SDM. Use of SDM is particularly limited in developmental and behavioral conditions, such as ADHD and ASD. These data suggest that challenges to implementing SDM may include disease type, complexity, and use of specialty care. Research to identify specific barriers and facilitators of SDM is needed to inform interventions that will promote SDM in developmental and behavioral conditions.

Getting on the same page: Communication, patient involvement and shared understanding of "decisions" in oncology.

Science.gov (United States)

Leppin, Aaron L; Kunneman, Marleen; Hathaway, Julie; Fernandez, Cara; Montori, Victor M; Tilburt, Jon C

2018-02-01

Patients and clinicians do not often agree on whether a decision has been made about cancer care. This could be explained by factors related to communication quality and/or the type of decision being made. We used a self-developed coding scheme to code a random sample of 128 encounters in which patients and clinicians either agreed (n=64) or disagreed (n=64) that a cancer care decision was made and tested for associations between concordance and key communication behaviours. We also identified and characterized cancer care decisions by topic and level of patient involvement and looked for trends. We identified 378 cancer care decisions across 128 encounters. Explicit decisions were most commonly made about topics wherein decision control could be easily delegated to a clear and present expert (eg either the patient or the clinician). Related to this, level of patient involvement varied significantly by decision topic. Explicit decisions were rarely made in an observable way about social, non-clinical or self-management related topics, although patients and clinicians both reported having made a cancer care decision in encounters where no decisions were observed. We found no association between communication behaviours and concordance in our sample. What counts as a "decision" in cancer care may be constructed within disparate social roles that leave many agendas unaddressed and decisions unmade. Changing the content of conversations to encourage explicit decisions about self-management and life context-related topics may have greater value in enabling shared understanding than promoting communication behaviours among already high-performing communicators. © 2017 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Self-Stigma and Consumer Participation in Shared Decision Making in Mental Health Services.

Science.gov (United States)

Hamann, Johannes; Bühner, Markus; Rüsch, Nicolas

2017-08-01

People with mental illness struggle with symptoms and with public stigma. Some accept common prejudices and lose self-esteem, resulting in shame and self-stigma, which may affect their interactions with mental health professionals. This study explored whether self-stigma and shame are associated with consumers' preferences for participation in medical decision making and their behavior in psychiatric consultations. In a cross-sectional study conducted in Germany, 329 individuals with a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder or an affective disorder and their psychiatrists provided sociodemographic and illness-related information. Self-stigma, shame, locus of control, and views about clinical decision making were assessed by self-report. Psychiatrists rated their impression of the decision-making behavior of consumers. Regression analyses and structural equation modeling were used to determine the association of self-stigma and shame with clinical decision making. Self-stigma was not related to consumers' participation preferences, but it was associated with some aspects of communicative behavior. Active and critical behavior (for example, expressing views, daring to challenge the doctor's opinion, and openly speaking out about disagreements with the doctor) was associated with less shame, less self-stigma, more self-responsibility, less attribution of external control to powerful others, and more years of education. Self-stigma and shame were associated with less participative and critical behavior, which probably leads to clinical encounters that involve less shared decision making and more paternalistic decision making. Paternalistic decision making may reinforce self-stigma and lead to poorer health outcomes. Therefore, interventions that reduce self-stigma and increase consumers' critical and participative communication may improve health outcomes.

From Perceived Values to Shared Values: A Multi-Stakeholder Spatial Decision Analysis (M-SSDA for Resilient Landscapes

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Maria Cerreta

2017-06-01

Full Text Available This paper puts forth a Multi-Stakeholder Spatial Decision Analysis (M-SSDA which combines Multi-Stakeholders Decision Analysis (M-SDA and GIS processing based on a collaborative, hybrid and adaptive evaluative approach to support the elaboration of enhancement strategies designed for resilient landscapes. This methodology has been tested in the research project “Cilento Labscape: An integrated model for the activation of a Living Lab in the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni”, which was conducted in the Cilento National Park (Southern Italy. The aim of the methodology is to find alternative touristic routes for the promotion of the Park. The different steps in the process will be described, as will the employment of multiple tools/techniques (interviews, GIS tools, Semantic Analysis, and Geo-Statistical Analysis to improve the reliability of the decision-making process. The most relevant results of the methodology will also be outlined in terms of the transition from the identification of the perceived landscape’s values to the acknowledgement of the shared values, and their consequent employment for the outlining of new thematic itineraries for the Park. To realise sustainable territorial strategies and preserve the landscape through bottom-up decision-making processes, the different local communities need to gain a new awareness of their identity shared values and make an active contribution towards promoting and managing their site-specific resources.

Development of a Conceptual Framework for Understanding Shared Decision making Among African-American LGBT Patients and their Clinicians.

Science.gov (United States)

Peek, Monica E; Lopez, Fanny Y; Williams, H Sharif; Xu, Lucy J; McNulty, Moira C; Acree, M Ellen; Schneider, John A

2016-06-01

Enhancing patient-centered care and shared decision making (SDM) has become a national priority as a means of engaging patients in their care, improving treatment adherence, and enhancing health outcomes. Relatively little is known about the healthcare experiences or shared decision making among racial/ethnic minorities who also identify as being LGBT. The purpose of this paper is to understand how race, sexual orientation and gender identity can simultaneously influence SDM among African-American LGBT persons, and to propose a model of SDM between such patients and their healthcare providers. We reviewed key constructs necessary for understanding SDM among African-American LGBT persons, which guided our systematic literature review. Eligible studies for the review included English-language studies of adults (≥ 19 y/o) in North America, with a focus on LGBT persons who were African-American/black (i.e., > 50 % of the study population) or included sub-analyses by sexual orientation/gender identity and race. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, PsycINFO, and Scopus databases using MESH terms and keywords related to shared decision making, communication quality (e.g., trust, bias), African-Americans, and LGBT persons. Additional references were identified by manual reviews of peer-reviewed journals' tables of contents and key papers' references. We identified 2298 abstracts, three of which met the inclusion criteria. Of the included studies, one was cross-sectional and two were qualitative; one study involved transgender women (91 % minorities, 65 % of whom were African-Americans), and two involved African-American men who have sex with men (MSM). All of the studies focused on HIV infection. Sexual orientation and gender identity were patient-reported factors that negatively impacted patient/provider relationships and SDM. Engaging in SDM helped some patients overcome normative beliefs about clinical encounters. In this paper, we present a

Children's participation in shared decision-making: children, adolescents, parents and healthcare professionals' perspectives and experiences.

Science.gov (United States)

Coyne, Imelda; Amory, Aislinn; Kiernan, Gemma; Gibson, Faith

2014-06-01

Despite decision-making featuring throughout the trajectory of cancer care, children's participation in decision-making remains an area much under-researched and complicated by conflicting opinions. This study explored children's participation in shared decision-making (SDM) from multiple perspectives from one haematology/oncology unit in Ireland. Qualitative research design was used to explore participants' experiences of children's decision-making. Interviews were conducted with children(1) aged 7-16 years (n = 20), their parents (n = 22) and healthcare professionals (n = 40). Data were managed with the aid of NVivo (version 8). Parents and children's roles in decision-making were significantly influenced by the seriousness of the illness. Cancer is a life-threatening illness and so the treatment 'had to be done'. Children were not involved in major decisions (treatment decisions) as refusal was not an option. They were generally involved in minor decisions (choices about care delivery) with the purpose of gaining their cooperation, making treatment more palatable, giving back a sense of control and building trusting relationships. These choices were termed 'small' decisions that would not compromise the child's welfare. Some adolescents were aware that choices were not 'real' decisions since they were not allowed to refuse and expressed feelings of frustration. Healthcare professionals and parents controlled the process of SDM and the children's accounts revealed that they held a minimal role. Children appeared content that adults held responsibility for the major treatment decisions. However, they desired and valued receiving information, voicing their preferences and choosing how treatments were administered to them. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Eyetracking and consumer decision research in marketing

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Oppewal, Harmen; Mueller Loose, Simone

friendliness of eyetracking equipment. Eyetracking, or the monitoring of eye movements, is of interest because eye movements indicate where consumers focus their attention when searching for information and making their purchase decisions. There are several marketing academics in Australia/ NZ who have started......This session will concentrate on the use of eyetracking for studying consumer decision making research in marketing. Eyetracking has been applied in marketing since the early 90s but only more recently the use of this technology has started to increase, due to lower cost and greater user....... The present session will discuss issues and recent progress in eyetracking studies in relation to studies of consumer decision making, especially in relation to decision making as studied in discrete choice experiments. The session will facilitate the sharing of experiences and thereby help develop the level...

LC Data QUEST: A Technical Architecture for Community Federated Clinical Data Sharing.

Science.gov (United States)

Stephens, Kari A; Lin, Ching-Ping; Baldwin, Laura-Mae; Echo-Hawk, Abigail; Keppel, Gina A; Buchwald, Dedra; Whitener, Ron J; Korngiebel, Diane M; Berg, Alfred O; Black, Robert A; Tarczy-Hornoch, Peter

2012-01-01

The University of Washington Institute of Translational Health Sciences is engaged in a project, LC Data QUEST, building data sharing capacity in primary care practices serving rural and tribal populations in the Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, Idaho region to build research infrastructure. We report on the iterative process of developing the technical architecture for semantically aligning electronic health data in primary care settings across our pilot sites and tools that will facilitate linkages between the research and practice communities. Our architecture emphasizes sustainable technical solutions for addressing data extraction, alignment, quality, and metadata management. The architecture provides immediate benefits to participating partners via a clinical decision support tool and data querying functionality to support local quality improvement efforts. The FInDiT tool catalogues type, quantity, and quality of the data that are available across the LC Data QUEST data sharing architecture. These tools facilitate the bi-directional process of translational research.

Transition from paternalism to shared decision making - a review of the educational environment in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia.

Science.gov (United States)

Vučemilović, Marta; Mahmić-Kaknjo, Mersiha; Pavličević, Ivančica

2016-05-01

In this article we will review the benefits of a system built on partnership of physicians and their patients, highlight some of the factors which impede this transition, and propose ways to address these factors. Also, we are going to analyze the educational environment in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia concerning ethics and communication skills. Personal responsibility of patients for their health should be reflected in their joint involvement in health decisions with their physicians. Patients, insecure about their individual competence surrounding their health decisions, tend to shy away from responsibility, whereas physicians, pressured by the responsibilities of the profession, do not always show sensitivity to all of the patient's concerns. They often treat illnesses instead of patients. A more open and collaborative relationship between the patient and the physician through shared decision making would be a better alternative. In the end, the patient ultimately decides whether a health intervention was satisfactory in fulfilling his or her specific needs. Transition from a paternalistic to a mutual relationship between doctors and patients has already begun. In an era of intense information sharing, shared decision making is a sensitive, ethical, legal, and political concept which needs empathic doctors with well-developed communication skills to integrate their clinical knowledge with patient-centered care. Transition from paternalistic to partner relation between physicians and patients is moving slowly ahead in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Educational environment is improving but needs intense efforts to develop further. Copyright © 2016 by Academy of Sciences and Arts of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

What are the decision-making preferences of patients in vascular surgery? A mixed-methods study.

Science.gov (United States)

Santema, T B Katrien; Stoffer, E Anniek; Kunneman, Marleen; Koelemay, Mark J W; Ubbink, Dirk T

2017-02-10

Shared decision-making (SDM) has been advocated as the preferred method of choosing a suitable treatment option. However, patient involvement in treatment decision-making is not yet common practice in the field of vascular surgery. The aim of this mixed-methods study was to explore patients' decision-making preferences and to investigate which facilitators and barriers patients perceive as important for the application of SDM in vascular surgery. Patients were invited to participate after visiting the vascular surgical outpatient clinic of an Academic Medical Center in the Netherlands. A treatment decision was made during the consultation for an abdominal aortic aneurysm or peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Patients filled in a number of questionnaires (quantitative part) and a random subgroup of patients participated in an in-depth interview (qualitative part). A total of 67 patients participated in this study. 58 per cent of them (n=39) indicated that they preferred a shared role in decision-making. In more than half of the patients (55%; n=37) their preferred role was in disagreement with what they had experienced. 31 per cent of the patients (n=21) preferred a more active role in the decision-making process than they had experienced. Patients indicated a good patient-doctor relationship as an important facilitator for the application of SDM. The vast majority of vascular surgical patients preferred, but did not experience a shared role in the decision-making process, although the concept of SDM was insufficiently clear to some patients. This emphasises the importance of explaining the concept of SDM and implementing it in the clinical encounter. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Design and development of a decision aid to enhance shared decision making by patients with an asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Dirk T Ubbink

2008-11-01

Full Text Available Dirk T Ubbink1,2, Anouk M Knops1, Sjaak Molenaar1, Astrid Goossens11Department of Quality Assurance and Process Innovation and 2Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsObjective: To design, develop, and evaluate an evidence-based decision aid (DA for patients with an asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA to inform them about the pros and cons of their treatment options (ie, surgery or watchful observation and to help them make a shared decision.Methods: A multidisciplinary team defined criteria for the desired DA as to design, medical content and functionality, particularly for elderly users. Development was according to the international standard (IPDAS. Fifteen patients with an AAA, who were either treated or not yet treated, evaluated the tool.Results: A DA was developed to offer information about the disease, the risks and benefits of surgical treatment and watchful observation, and the individual possibilities and threats based on the patient’s aneurysm diameter and risk profile. The DA was improved and judged favorably by physicians and patients.Conclusion: This evidence-based DA for AAA patients, developed according to IPDAS criteria, is likely to be a simple, user-friendly tool to offer patients evidence-based information about the pros and cons of treatment options for AAA, to improve patients’ understanding of the disease and treatment options, and may support decision making based on individual values.Keywords: decision support techniques, research design, program development, abdominal aortic aneurysm, decision making

Shared Decision Making in mental health care using Routine Outcome Monitoring as a source of information: a cluster randomised controlled trial

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Metz, M.J.; Franx, G.C.; Verbeek, M.A.; de Beurs, E.; van der Feltz-Cornelis, C.M.; Beekman, A.T.

2015-01-01

Background Shared Decision Making (SDM) is a way to empower patients when decisions are made about treatment. In order to be effective agents in this process, patients need access to information of good quality. Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM) may provide such information and therefore may be a key

A patient perspective on shared decision making in stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a mixed methods study.

Science.gov (United States)

Hopmans, Wendy; Damman, Olga C; Senan, Suresh; Hartemink, Koen J; Smit, Egbert F; Timmermans, Danielle R M

2015-12-16

Surgery and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) are both curative treatment options for patients with a stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Consequently, there is growing interest in studying the role of patients in treatment decision making. We studied how patients with stage I NSCLC perceived shared decision making (SDM) in general, and how they viewed different aspects of SDM. A sequential mixed methods design was used, consisting of qualitative interviews (N=11), as well as a survey study (N=76) focusing on different SDM-related aspects. Participants were interviewed to understand their own experience with treatment decision making. In the survey study, patients rated the importance of 20 aspects of shared decision making that were identified during interviews. Descriptive analysis and explorative factor analysis were performed. We assessed six qualitative themes covering SDM aspects that were determined by patients to be important. The survey identified four SDM-related factors with sufficient internal consistency, namely (1) 'guidance by clinician' (α=.741), (2) 'conduct of clinician' (α=.774); (3) 'preparation for treatment decision making' (α=.864); and (4) 'active role of patient in treatment decision making' (α=.782). Of these, clinician guidance was rated as most important by patients (M=3.61; SD=.44). Only 28.9% of patients in the survey study reported that both treatment options were discussed with them. Patients with a stage I NSCLC found clinician guidance to be important when making treatment decisions. Nevertheless, the majority of patients reported not being offered both treatment options, which might have influenced this finding.

The effects of activity-travel context and individual attitudes on car-sharing decisions under travel time uncertainty : a hybrid choice modeling approach

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Kim, J.; Rasouli, S.; Timmermans, H.J.P.

2017-01-01

People's daily decision to use car-sharing rather than other transport modes for conducting a specific activity has been investigated recently in assessing the market potential of car-sharing systems. Most studies have estimated transport mode choice models with an extended choice set using

Shared decision making in type 2 diabetes with a support decision tool that takes into account clinical factors, the intensity of treatment and patient preferences : Design of a cluster randomised (OPTIMAL) trial

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Den Ouden, Henk; Vos, Rimke C.; Reidsma, Carla; Rutten, Guy Ehm

2015-01-01

Background: No more than 10-15% of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients achieve all treatment goals regarding glycaemic control, lipids and blood pressure. Shared decision making (SDM) should increase that percentage; however, not all support decision tools are appropriate. Because the

Facilitating the development of a shared purpose in a university department: the first stage towards developing a culture of shared governance

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Brian McGowan

2016-11-01

Full Text Available Background and context: The structure of higher education departments tends to be hierarchical or, at the other extreme, characterised as ‘a galaxy of individual stars’ (Handy, 1993 p 190. Ours was no exception. However, changes in the way nursing education was provided, internal growth and development followed by a period of austerity, presented our school with an unprecedented opportunity. We found ourselves in a position where we had the possibility to change. Aims: The aim of the paper is to share our reflections on the process and outcomes to date of a culture change project in a university department. The purpose of this opening part of the project was to enable creative and collegial opportunities to work together. Conclusions: An inclusive culture can make a difference to peoples’ lives and reflect the underpinning principles of person-centred practice. This project has enabled us to define our shared purpose, clarify our values, make commitments and set standards. Overall, though it has allowed us to see each other as people who have emerged from behind a faceless organisational structure. Implications for practice: The values of inclusiveness, integrity and professionalism are important for a shared understanding and effective collaborative functioning within university departments internationally, especially those that espouse person-centredness Staff teams can be structured around professional and personal development needs but these also provide a direct link to both departmental and organisational purposes aligned to education Managerial support, staff participation and an experienced facilitator are vital for successful cultural change. Our project has been UK based but we believe these experiences to be transferable and of interest to university departments elsewhere that aspire to create cultures that enable staff, and therefore students and the wider community, to flourish

Risk Stratification and Shared Decision Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Science.gov (United States)

Schroy, Paul C; Duhovic, Emir; Chen, Clara A; Heeren, Timothy C; Lopez, William; Apodaca, Danielle L; Wong, John B

2016-05-01

Eliciting patient preferences within the context of shared decision making has been advocated for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, yet providers often fail to comply with patient preferences that differ from their own. To determine whether risk stratification for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) influences provider willingness to comply with patient preferences when selecting a desired CRC screening option. Randomized controlled trial. Asymptomatic, average-risk patients due for CRC screening in an urban safety net health care setting. Patients were randomized 1:1 to a decision aid alone (n= 168) or decision aid plus risk assessment (n= 173) arm between September 2012 and September 2014. The primary outcome was concordance between patient preference and test ordered; secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction with the decision-making process, screening intentions, test completion rates, and provider satisfaction. Although providers perceived risk stratification to be useful in selecting an appropriate screening test for their average-risk patients, no significant differences in concordance were observed between the decision aid alone and decision aid plus risk assessment groups (88.1% v. 85.0%,P= 0.40) or high- and low-risk groups (84.5% v. 87.1%,P= 0.51). Concordance was highest for colonoscopy and relatively low for tests other than colonoscopy, regardless of study arm or risk group. Failure to comply with patient preferences was negatively associated with satisfaction with the decision-making process, screening intentions, and test completion rates. Single-institution setting; lack of provider education about the utility of risk stratification into their decision making. Providers perceived risk stratification to be useful in their decision making but often failed to comply with patient preferences for tests other than colonoscopy, even among those deemed to be at low risk of ACN. © The Author(s) 2016.

Development of a program theory for shared decision-making: a realist review protocol.

Science.gov (United States)

Groot, Gary; Waldron, Tamara; Carr, Tracey; McMullen, Linda; Bandura, Lori-Ann; Neufeld, Shelley-May; Duncan, Vicky

2017-06-17

The practicality of applying evidence to healthcare systems with the aim of implementing change is an ongoing challenge for practitioners, policy makers, and academics. Shared decision- making (SDM), a method of medical decision-making that allows a balanced relationship between patients, physicians, and other key players in the medical decision process, is purported to improve patient and system outcomes. Despite the oft-mentioned benefits, there are gaps in the current literature between theory and implementation that would benefit from a realist approach given the value of this methodology to analyze complex interventions. In this protocol, we outline a study that will explore: "In which situations, how, why, and for whom does SDM between patients and health care providers contribute to improved decision making?" A seven step iterative process will be described including preliminary theory development, establishment of a search strategy, selection and appraisal of literature, data extraction, analysis and synthesis of extracted results from literature, and formation of a revised program theory with the input of patients, physicians, nurse navigators, and policy makers from a stakeholder session. The goal of the realist review will be to identify and refine a program theory for SDM through the identification of mechanisms which shape the characteristics of when, how, and why SDM will, and will not, work. PROSPERO CRD42017062609.

Use of implicit persuasion in decision making about adjuvant cancer treatment: A potential barrier to shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Engelhardt, Ellen G; Pieterse, Arwen H; van der Hout, Anja; de Haes, Hanneke J C J M; Kroep, Judith R; Quarles van Ufford-Mannesse, Patricia; Portielje, Johanneke E A; Smets, Ellen M A; Stiggelbout, Anne M

2016-10-01

Shared decision making (SDM) is widely advocated, especially for preference-sensitive decisions like those on adjuvant treatment for early-stage cancer. Here, decision making involves a subjective trade-off between benefits and side-effects, and therefore, patients' informed preferences should be taken into account. If clinicians consciously or unconsciously steer patients towards the option they think is in their patients' best interest (i.e. implicit persuasion), they may be unwittingly subverting their own efforts to implement SDM. We assessed the frequency of use of implicit persuasion during consultations and whether the use of implicit persuasion was associated with expected treatment benefit and/or decision making. Observational study design in which consecutive consultations about adjuvant systemic therapy with stage I-II breast cancer patients treated at oncology outpatient clinics of general teaching hospitals and university medical centres were audiotaped, transcribed and coded by two researchers independently. In total, 105 patients (median age = 59; range: 35-87 years) were included. A median of five (range: 2-10) implicitly persuasive behaviours were employed per consultation. The number of behaviours used did not differ by disease stage (P = 0.07), but did differ by treatment option presented (P = 0.002) and nodal status (P = 0.01). About 50% of patients with stage I or node-negative disease were steered towards undergoing chemotherapy, whereas 96% of patients were steered towards undergoing endocrine therapy, irrespective of expected treatment benefit. Decisions were less often postponed if more implicit persuasion was used (P = 0.03). Oncologists frequently use implicit persuasion, steering patients towards the treatment option that they think is in their patients' best interest. Expected treatment benefit does not always seem to be the driving force behind implicit persuasion. Awareness of one's use of these steering behaviours

Learning from staff to share knowledge and inform decision-making: the Contra Costa County experience.

Science.gov (United States)

Winship, Kathy

2012-01-01

In an effort to increase staff engagement and opportunities for greater two-way communication between managers and staff, a strategic plan was developed involving administration of an agency-wide staff satisfaction survey. A comprehensive survey was administered to nearly 1700 employees throughout the agency, which encompasses several diverse bureaus ranging from child and family services, aging and adult services, and a workforce investment board. The online survey included 36 questions aimed at gathering staff perspectives on job satisfaction, work expectations, supervision, and information sharing within the agency. 825 employees responded to the survey, and findings were analyzed and shared agency-wide. Results of the survey have been used to inform ongoing agency change and to facilitate continued engagement of staff in organizational goals and initiatives. Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

Shared decision-making in Israel: status, barriers, and recommendations

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Miron-Shatz Talya

2012-01-01

Full Text Available Abstract Shared decision making (SDM - involving patients in decisions relevant to their health - has been increasingly influential in medical thought and practice around the world. This paper reviews the current status of SDM in Israel, including efforts to promote SDM in the legislation and healthcare system, its influence in medical training and the national health plans, and funding for SDM-related research. Published studies of SDM in Israel are also reviewed. Although informed consent and patients' right to information are regulated by Israeli law, little provision is made for SDM. Further, there are few organized programs to promote SDM among medical professionals or the public, and governmental support of SDM-related research is minimal. Nonetheless, patients have begun to influence litigation in both formal and informal capacities, medical schools have begun to incorporate courses for improving physician-patient communication into their curricula, and the largest national health plan has initiated a plan to increase public awareness. A review of the limited research literature suggests that although patients and physicians express a desire for greater patient involvement, they often have reservations about its implementation. Research also suggests that despite the positive effects of SDM, such an approach may only infrequently be applied in actual clinical practice. In conclusion, though not actively promoting SDM at present, Israel's universal coverage and small number of health plans make rapid, widespread advances in SDM feasible. Israeli policymakers should thus be encouraged to nurture burgeoning initiatives and set plausible milestones. Comparing the status of SDM in Israel with that in other countries may stimulate further advancement.

Implementing shared decision making in Denmark

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Dahl Steffensen, Karina; Hjelholt Baker, Vibe; Vinter, Mette Marianne

2017-01-01

national plan for cancer treatment. What about tools for patient decision support? Development of evidence-based patient decision aids (PDAs) are still at an early stage in Denmark, but recent national and private funding has helped push the field forward. Furthermore, a few stakeholders have started...

Most important factors for the implementation of shared decision making in sciatica care : Ranking among professionals and patients

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Hofstede, Stefanie N; van Bodegom-Vos, Leti; Wentink, Manon M; Vleggeert-Lankamp, Carmen L A; Vliet Vlieland, Thea P M; Marang-van de Mheen, Perla J; Vroomen, P.C.

2014-01-01

INTRODUCTION: Due to the increasing specialization of medical professionals, patients are treated by multiple disciplines. To ensure that delivered care is patient-centered, it is crucial that professionals and the patient together decide on treatment (shared decision making (SDM)). However, it is

Parent Preferences for Shared Decision-making in Acute Versus Chronic Illness.

Science.gov (United States)

Tom, Dina M; Aquino, Christian; Arredondo, Anthony R; Foster, Byron A

2017-10-01

The goal of this study was to examine preferences for shared decision-making (SDM) in parents of acutely ill versus chronically ill children in the inpatient setting. Additionally, we explored the effect of parental perception of illness severity and uncertainty in illness on decision-making preference. In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed parents of children admitted to pediatric inpatient units at an academic, tertiary-care hospital. Surveys were administered in person and used validated tools to assess SDM preferences and uncertainty in illness. Descriptive statistics evaluated associations stratified by acute versus chronic illness, and multivariable analyses were performed. Of the 200 parents who participated, the majority were women (78%), Hispanic (81.5%), English speaking (73%), between 30 and 39 years old (37.5%), and had an education achievement of less than a college degree (77%). The mean age of hospitalized children was 8.1 years, and half reported a chronic illness. Most parents preferred an active (43%) or collaborative (40%) role in SDM. There was no association with SDM preference by demographics, number of previous hospitalizations, perception of illness severity, or uncertainty. However, parents of chronically ill children significantly preferred a passive role in SDM when they perceived a high level of uncertainty in illness. Most parents of hospitalized children prefer to take an active or collaborative role in SDM. However, parents of chronically ill children who perceive high levels of uncertainty surrounding their children's illness prefer a passive role, thus illustrating the complexity in decision-making among this parent population. Copyright © 2017 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

The Experience of Older People in the Shared Decision-Making Process in Advanced Kidney Care

Science.gov (United States)

Jenkins, Karen; McManus, Breeda; Gracey, Brian

2016-01-01

Introduction. This qualitative descriptive study was designed to understand the experiences of older people (>70 years) when making a decision about renal replacement therapy. This was a coproduced study, whereby patients and carers were involved in all aspects of the research process. Methods. A Patient and Carer Group undertook volunteer and research training. The group developed the interview questions and interviewed 29 people who had commenced dialysis or made a decision not to have dialysis. Interview data were transcribed and analysed, and common themes were identified. Results. 22 men and 7 women (mean age 77.4 yrs) from two hospitals were interviewed. 18 had chosen haemodialysis, 6 peritoneal dialysis, and 5 supportive care. The majority of patients were involved in the dialysis decision. Most were satisfied with the amount of information that they received, although some identified that the quality of the information could be improved, especially how daily living can be affected by dialysis. Conclusion. Our findings show that overall older patients were involved in the dialysis decision along with their families. Our approach is innovative because it is the first time that patients and carers have been involved in a coproduced study about shared decision-making. PMID:27990438

Shared Decision Making in Intensive Care Units: An American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society Policy Statement

Science.gov (United States)

Kon, Alexander A.; Davidson, Judy E.; Morrison, Wynne; Danis, Marion; White, Douglas B.

2015-01-01

Objectives Shared decision-making (SDM) is endorsed by critical care organizations, however there remains confusion about what SDM is, when it should be used, and approaches to promote partnerships in treatment decisions. The purpose of this statement is to define SDM, recommend when SDM should be used, identify the range of ethically acceptable decision-making models, and present important communication skills. Methods The American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) and American Thoracic Society (ATS) Ethics Committees reviewed empirical research and normative analyses published in peer-reviewed journals to generate recommendations. Recommendations approved by consensus of the full Ethics Committees of ACCM and ATS were included in the statement. Main Results Six recommendations were endorsed: 1) Definition: Shared decision-making is a collaborative process that allows patients, or their surrogates, and clinicians to make health care decisions together, taking into account the best scientific evidence available, as well as the patient’s values, goals, and preferences. 2) Clinicians should engage in a SDM process to define overall goals of care (including decisions regarding limiting or withdrawing life-prolonging interventions) and when making major treatment decisions that may be affected by personal values, goals, and preferences. 3) Clinicians should use as their “default” approach a SDM process that includes three main elements: information exchange, deliberation, and making a treatment decision. 4) A wide range of decision-making approaches are ethically supportable including patient- or surrogate-directed and clinician-directed models. Clinicians should tailor the decision-making process based on the preferences of the patient or surrogate. 5) Clinicians should be trained in communication skills. 6) Research is needed to evaluate decision-making strategies. Conclusions Patient and surrogate preferences for decision-making roles regarding value

Moral imagination: Facilitating prosocial decision-making through scene imagery and theory of mind.

Science.gov (United States)

Gaesser, Brendan; Keeler, Kerri; Young, Liane

2018-02-01

How we imagine and subjectively experience the future can inform how we make decisions in the present. Here, we examined a prosocial effect of imagining future episodes in motivating moral decisions about helping others in need, as well as the underlying cognitive mechanisms. Across three experiments we found that people are more willing to help others in specific situations after imagining helping them in those situations. Manipulating the spatial representation of imagined future episodes in particular was effective at increasing intentions to help others, suggesting that scene imagery plays an important role in the prosocial effect of episodic simulation. Path modeling analyses revealed that episodic simulation interacts with theory of mind in facilitating prosocial responses but can also operate independently. Moreover, we found that our manipulations of the imagined helping episode increased actual prosocial behavior, which also correlated with changes in reported willingness to help. Based on these findings, we propose a new model that begins to capture the multifaceted mechanisms by which episodic simulation contributes to prosocial decision-making, highlighting boundaries and promising future directions to explore. Implications for research in moral cognition, imagination, and patients with impairments in episodic simulation are discussed. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Patients' and observers' perceptions of involvement differ. Validation study on inter-relating measures for shared decision making.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jürgen Kasper

Full Text Available OBJECTIVE: Patient involvement into medical decisions as conceived in the shared decision making method (SDM is essential in evidence based medicine. However, it is not conclusively evident how best to define, realize and evaluate involvement to enable patients making informed choices. We aimed at investigating the ability of four measures to indicate patient involvement. While use and reporting of these instruments might imply wide overlap regarding the addressed constructs this assumption seems questionable with respect to the diversity of the perspectives from which the assessments are administered. METHODS: The study investigated a nested cohort (N = 79 of a randomized trial evaluating a patient decision aid on immunotherapy for multiple sclerosis. Convergent validities were calculated between observer ratings of videotaped physician-patient consultations (OPTION and patients' perceptions of the communication (Shared Decision Making Questionnaire, Control Preference Scale & Decisional Conflict Scale. RESULTS: OPTION reliability was high to excellent. Communication performance was low according to OPTION and high according to the three patient administered measures. No correlations were found between observer and patient judges, neither for means nor for single items. Patient report measures showed some moderate correlations. CONCLUSION: Existing SDM measures do not refer to a single construct. A gold standard is missing to decide whether any of these measures has the potential to indicate patient involvement. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Pronounced heterogeneity of the underpinning constructs implies difficulties regarding the interpretation of existing evidence on the efficacy of SDM. Consideration of communication theory and basic definitions of SDM would recommend an inter-subjective focus of measurement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN25267500.

Patients' and observers' perceptions of involvement differ. Validation study on inter-relating measures for shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Kasper, Jürgen; Heesen, Christoph; Köpke, Sascha; Fulcher, Gary; Geiger, Friedemann

2011-01-01

Patient involvement into medical decisions as conceived in the shared decision making method (SDM) is essential in evidence based medicine. However, it is not conclusively evident how best to define, realize and evaluate involvement to enable patients making informed choices. We aimed at investigating the ability of four measures to indicate patient involvement. While use and reporting of these instruments might imply wide overlap regarding the addressed constructs this assumption seems questionable with respect to the diversity of the perspectives from which the assessments are administered. The study investigated a nested cohort (N = 79) of a randomized trial evaluating a patient decision aid on immunotherapy for multiple sclerosis. Convergent validities were calculated between observer ratings of videotaped physician-patient consultations (OPTION) and patients' perceptions of the communication (Shared Decision Making Questionnaire, Control Preference Scale & Decisional Conflict Scale). OPTION reliability was high to excellent. Communication performance was low according to OPTION and high according to the three patient administered measures. No correlations were found between observer and patient judges, neither for means nor for single items. Patient report measures showed some moderate correlations. Existing SDM measures do not refer to a single construct. A gold standard is missing to decide whether any of these measures has the potential to indicate patient involvement. Pronounced heterogeneity of the underpinning constructs implies difficulties regarding the interpretation of existing evidence on the efficacy of SDM. Consideration of communication theory and basic definitions of SDM would recommend an inter-subjective focus of measurement. Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN25267500.

Independence and shared decision making: the role of smart home technology in empowering older adults.

Science.gov (United States)

Demiris, George

2009-01-01

This study aims to explore the concepts of independence and shared decision making in the context of smart home technologies for older adults. We conducted a Delphi study with three rounds involving smart home designers, and researchers as well as community dwelling older adults. While there were differences in the way different stakeholders define these concepts, the study findings provide clear implications for the design, implementation and evaluation of smart home applications.

Toward Optimal Decision Making among Vulnerable Patients Referred for Cardiac Surgery: A Qualitative Analysis of Patient and Provider Perspectives.

Science.gov (United States)

Gainer, Ryan A; Curran, Janet; Buth, Karen J; David, Jennie G; Légaré, Jean-Francois; Hirsch, Gregory M

2017-07-01

Comprehension of risks, benefits, and alternative treatment options has been shown to be poor among patients referred for cardiac interventions. Patients' values and preferences are rarely explicitly sought. An increasing proportion of frail and older patients are undergoing complex cardiac surgical procedures with increased risk of both mortality and prolonged institutional care. We sought input from patients and caregivers to determine the optimal approach to decision making in this vulnerable patient population. Focus groups were held with both providers and former patients. Three focus groups were convened for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG), Valve, or CABG +Valve patients ≥ 70 y old (2-y post-op, ≤ 8-wk post-op, complicated post-op course) (n = 15). Three focus groups were convened for Intermediate Medical Care Unit (IMCU) nurses, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) nurses, surgeons, anesthesiologists and cardiac intensivists (n = 20). We used a semi-structured interview format to ask questions surrounding the informed consent process. Transcribed audio data was analyzed to develop consistent and comprehensive themes. We identified 5 main themes that influence the decision making process: educational barriers, educational facilitators, patient autonomy and perceived autonomy, patient and family expectations of care, and decision making advocates. All themes were influenced by time constraints experienced in the current consent process. Patient groups expressed a desire to receive information earlier in their care to allow time to identify personal values and preferences in developing plans for treatment. Both groups strongly supported a formal approach for shared decision making with a decisional coach to provide information and facilitate communication with the care team. Identifying the barriers and facilitators to patient and caretaker engagement in decision making is a key step in the development of a structured, patient-centered SDM approach. Intervention

Exploring the use of Option Grid™ patient decision aids in a sample of clinics in Poland.

Science.gov (United States)

Scalia, Peter; Elwyn, Glyn; Barr, Paul; Song, Julia; Zisman-Ilani, Yaara; Lesniak, Monika; Mullin, Sarah; Kurek, Krzysztof; Bushell, Matt; Durand, Marie-Anne

2018-05-29

Research on the implementation of patient decision aids to facilitate shared decision making in clinical settings has steadily increased across Western countries. A study which implements decision aids and measures their impact on shared decision making has yet to be conducted in the Eastern part of Europe. To study the use of Option Grid TM patient decision aids in a sample of Grupa LUX MED clinics in Warsaw, Poland, and measure their impact on shared decision making. We conducted a pre-post interventional study. Following a three-month period of usual care, clinicians from three Grupa LUX MED clinics received a one-hour training session on how to use three Option Grid TM decision aids and were provided with copies for use for four months. Throughout the study, all eligible patients were asked to complete the three-item CollaboRATE patient-reported measure of shared decision making after their clinical encounter. CollaboRATE enables patients to assess the efforts clinicians make to: (i) inform them about their health issues; (ii) listen to 'what matters most'; (iii) integrate their treatment preference in future plans. A Hierarchical Logistic Regression model was performed to understand which variables had an effect on CollaboRATE. 2,048 patients participated in the baseline phase; 1,889 patients participated in the intervention phase. Five of the thirteen study clinicians had a statistically significant increase in their CollaboRATE scores (pOption Grid TM helped some clinicians practice shared decision making as reflected in CollaboRATE scores, but most clinicians did not have a significant increase in their scores. Our study indicates that the effect of these interventions may be dependent on clinic contexts and clinician engagement. Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

Oncologists’ view of informed consent and shared decision making in paediatric radiation oncology

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Olson, Robert A.; Bobinski, Mary Ann; Ho, Anita; Goddard, Karen J.

2012-01-01

Background and purpose: Cure rates of paediatric malignancies have dramatically improved with therapy intensification, at the cost of late treatment side effects. A survey was developed, centred around medulloblastoma scenarios, in order to explore paediatric oncology physicians’ views on discussing late effects and involving parents in treatment decisions. Materials and methods: Participants were 59 paediatric radiation and medical oncologists or fellows from USA (22), Canada (18), Europe (16), Australia (2), and Asia (1). Results: Ninety-five percent of respondents indicated late effects discussion prior to multimodality treatment was important. Of those who supported it, 100%, 83%, 64%, and 48% thought discussing cognitive impairment, infertility, stroke, and seizures as potential late effects was important, respectively. Only 71% of respondents believed parents should be involved in treatment decisions, which did not significantly vary by respondent age, country, specialty, gender, or years in practice. Conclusions: The majority of oncologists who treat children believe discussing late effects with parents is important. However, there is mixed opinion on which late effects should be discussed and whether parents should be involved in deciding which treatments should be pursued. Research into perceived barriers to shared decision making and effective methods of improving the informed consent process in paediatric malignancies is needed.

Understanding the Harms and Benefits of Cancer Screening: A Model of Factors That Shape Informed Decision Making.

Science.gov (United States)

Petrova, Dafina; Garcia-Retamero, Rocio; Cokely, Edward T

2015-10-01

Decisions about cancer screenings often involve the consideration of complex and counterintuitive evidence. We investigated psychological factors that promote the comprehension of benefits and harms associated with common cancer screenings and their influence on shared decision making. In experiment 1, 256 men received information about PSA-based prostate cancer screening. In experiment 2, 355 women received information about mammography-based breast cancer screening. In both studies, information about potential screening outcomes was provided in 1 of 3 formats: text, a fact box, or a visual aid (e.g., mortality with and without screening and rate of overdiagnosis). We modeled the interplay of comprehension, perceived risks and benefits, intention to participate in screening, and desire for shared decision making. Generally, visual aids were the most effective format, increasing comprehension by up to 18%. Improved comprehension was associated with 1) superior decision making (e.g., fewer intentions to participate in screening when it offered no benefit) and 2) more desire to share in decision making. However, comprehension of the evidence had a limited effect on experienced emotions, risk perceptions, and decision making among those participants who felt that the consequences of cancer were extremely severe. Even when information is counterintuitive and requires the integration of complex harms and benefits, user-friendly risk communications can facilitate comprehension, improve high-stakes decisions, and promote shared decision making. However, previous beliefs about the effectiveness of screening or strong fears about specific cancers may interfere with comprehension and informed decision making. © The Author(s) 2015.

Decision Making and Cancer

OpenAIRE

Reyna, Valerie F.; Nelson, Wendy L.; Han, Paul K.; Pignone, Michael P.

2015-01-01

We review decision-making along the cancer continuum in the contemporary context of informed and shared decision making, in which patients are encouraged to take a more active role in their health care. We discuss challenges to achieving informed and shared decision making, including cognitive limitations and emotional factors, but argue that understanding the mechanisms of decision making offers hope for improving decision support. Theoretical approaches to decision making that explain cogni...

Insights into the concept and measurement of health literacy from a study of shared decision-making in a low literacy population.

Science.gov (United States)

Smith, Sian K; Nutbeam, Don; McCaffery, Kirsten J

2013-08-01

This article explores the concept and measurement of health literacy in the context of shared health decision-making. It draws upon a series of qualitative and quantitative studies undertaken in the development and evaluation of a bowel cancer screening decision aid for low literacy populations. The findings indicate that different types of health literacy (functional, interactive and critical) are required in decision-making and present a set of instruments to assess and discriminate between higher level health literacy skills required for engagement in decision-making. It concludes that greater sophistication in both the definition and measurement of health literacy in research is needed.

The impact of DECISION+2 on patient intention to engage in shared decision making: secondary analysis of a multicentre clustered randomized trial.

Science.gov (United States)

Couët, Nicolas; Labrecque, Michel; Robitaille, Hubert; Turcotte, Stéphane; Légaré, France

2015-12-01

Training health professionals in shared decision making (SDM) may influence their patients' intention to engage in SDM. To assess the impact of DECISION+2, a SDM training programme for family physicians about the use of antibiotics to treat acute respiratory infections (ARIs), on their patients' intention to engage in SDM in future consultations. Secondary analysis of a multicentre clustered randomized trial. Three hundred and fifty-nine patients consulting family physicians about an ARI in nine family practice teaching units (FPTUs). DECISION+2 (two-hour online tutorial, two-hour workshop, and decision support tools) was offered in the experimental group (five FPTUs, 162 physicians, 181 patients). Usual care was provided in the control group (four FPTUs, 108 physicians, 178 patients). Change in patients' intention scores (range -3 to +3) between pre- and post-consultation. The mean ± SD [median] scores of intention to engage in SDM were high in both study groups before consultation (DECISION+2 group: 1.4 ± 1.0 [1.7]; control group: 1.5 ± 1.1 [1.7]) and increased in both groups after consultation (DECISION+2 group: 2.1 ± 1.1 [2.7]; control group: 1.9 ± 1.2 [2.3]). Change of intention, classified as either increased, stable or decreased, was not statistically associated with the exposure to the DECISION+2 programme after adjusting for the cluster design (proportional odds ratio = 1.5; 95% confidence interval = 0.8-3.0). DECISION+2 had no significant impact on patients' intention to engage in SDM for choosing to use antibiotics or not to treat an ARI in future consultations. Patient-targeted interventions may be necessary to achieve this purpose. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Preferences and experiences of chronically ill and disabled patients regarding shared decision-making: does the type of care to be decided upon matter?

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Brink-Muinen, A. van den; Spreeuwenberg, P.; Rijken, M.

2011-01-01

OBJECTIVE: (1) To describe the importance chronically ill and disabled patients attach to involvement in decision-making when various care types are considered, and (2) to analyse the degree to which these patients are involved in shared decision-making (SDM) regarding these care types, and whether

Organizational- and system-level characteristics that influence implementation of shared decision-making and strategies to address them - a scoping review.

Science.gov (United States)

Scholl, Isabelle; LaRussa, Allison; Hahlweg, Pola; Kobrin, Sarah; Elwyn, Glyn

2018-03-09

Shared decision-making (SDM) is poorly implemented in routine care, despite being promoted by health policies. No reviews have solely focused on an in-depth synthesis of the literature around organizational- and system-level characteristics (i.e., characteristics of healthcare organizations and of healthcare systems) that may affect SDM implementation. A synthesis would allow exploration of interventions to address these characteristics. The study aim was to compile a comprehensive overview of organizational- and system-level characteristics that are likely to influence the implementation of SDM, and to describe strategies to address those characteristics described in the literature. We conducted a scoping review using the Arksey and O'Malley framework. The search strategy included an electronic search and a secondary search including gray literature. We included publications reporting on projects that promoted implementation of SDM or other decision support interventions in routine healthcare. We screened titles and abstracts, and assessed full texts for eligibility. We used qualitative thematic analysis to identify organizational- and system-level characteristics. After screening 7745 records and assessing 354 full texts for eligibility, 48 publications on 32 distinct implementation projects were included. Most projects (N = 22) were conducted in the USA. Several organizational-level characteristics were described as influencing the implementation of SDM, including organizational leadership, culture, resources, and priorities, as well as teams and workflows. Described system-level characteristics included policies, clinical guidelines, incentives, culture, education, and licensing. We identified potential strategies to influence the described characteristics, e.g., examples how to facilitate distribution of decision aids in a healthcare institution. Although infrequently studied, organizational- and system-level characteristics appear to play a role in the

Anorexia, bulimia, and obesity: shared decision making deficits on the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT).

Science.gov (United States)

Brogan, Amy; Hevey, David; Pignatti, Riccardo

2010-07-01

The pathological eating behaviors in Anorexia Nervosa (AN), Bulimia Nervosa (BN), and obesity are characterized by a preference for high immediate reward, despite higher future losses in terms of both physical and psychological outcomes. The present study compared the decision making profile of females with a diagnosis of AN (n = 22), BN (n = 17), obesity (n = 18), and a healthy weight comparison group (n = 20) using a standardized neuropsychological test, the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). The three clinical groups (AN, BN, obesity) were significantly impaired on the IGT compared with the comparison group on both overall task performance and task learning; however, the three clinical groups were not significantly different from each other. Sixty-one percent to 77% of the clinical groups reached the threshold for impairment on the IGT, compared with 15% of the comparison group. The potential basis for this shared decision making profile is discussed.

Spontaneous mental associations with the words "side effect": Implications for informed and shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Izadi, Sonya; Pachur, Thorsten; Wheeler, Courtney; McGuire, Jaclyn; Waters, Erika A

2017-10-01

To gain insight into patients' medical decisions by exploring the content of laypeople's spontaneous mental associations with the term "side effect." An online cross-sectional survey asked 144 women aged 40-74, "What are the first three things you think of when you hear the words 'side effect?"' Data were analyzed using content analysis, chi-square, and Fisher's exact tests. 17 codes emerged and were grouped into 4 themes and a Miscellaneous category: Health Problems (70.8% of participants), Decision-Relevant Evaluations (52.8%), Negative Affect (30.6%), Practical Considerations (18.1%) and Miscellaneous (9.7%). The 4 most frequently identified codes were: Risk (36.1%), Health Problems-Specific Symptoms (35.4%), Health Problems-General Terms (32.6%), and Negative Affect-Strong (19.4%). Code and theme frequencies were generally similar across demographic groups (ps>0.05). The term "side effect" spontaneously elicited comments related to identifying health problems and expressing negative emotions. This might explain why the mere possibility of side effects triggers negative affect for people making medical decisions. Some respondents also mentioned decision-relevant evaluations and practical considerations in response to side effects. Addressing commonly-held associations and acknowledging negative affects provoked by side effects are first steps healthcare providers can take towards improving informed and shared patient decision making. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Development and psychometric properties of the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire--physician version (SDM-Q-Doc).

Science.gov (United States)

Scholl, Isabelle; Kriston, Levente; Dirmaier, Jörg; Buchholz, Angela; Härter, Martin

2012-08-01

To develop and psychometrically test a brief instrument for assessing the physician's perspective of the shared decision-making process in clinical encounters. We adapted the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) for patients to generate a new version for physicians (SDM-Q-Doc). The physician version was tested in clinical encounters between 29 physicians and 324 patients in German outpatient care contexts. Analyses of the extent to which the instrument was accepted, the reliability of the instrument, and the factorial structure of the scale were performed. Physicians showed a high level of acceptance toward the SDM-Q-Doc. Item discrimination parameters were above .4 for all but one item. An analysis of internal consistency yielded a Cronbach's α of .88. Factor analysis confirmed a one-dimensional structure. The results of this study suggest that the SDM-Q-Doc is a well-accepted and reliable instrument for assessing the physician's perspective during SDM processes in clinical encounters. To our knowledge, the SDM-Q-Doc is the first psychometrically tested scale available for assessing the physician's perspective. The SDM-Q-Doc can be used in studies that analyze the effectiveness of the implementation of SDM and as a quality indicator in quality assurance programs and health service assessments. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

[Transparency in public health decision-making].

Science.gov (United States)

García-Altés, Anna; Argimon, Josep M

2016-11-01

Improving the quality and transparency of governmental healthcare decision-making has an impact on the health of the population through policies, organisational management and clinical practice. Moreover, the comparison between healthcare centres and the transparent feedback of results to professionals and to the wider public contribute directly to improved results. The "Results Centre" of the Catalan healthcare system measures and disseminates the results achieved by the different healthcare centres in order to facilitate a shared decision-making process, thereby enhancing the quality of healthcare provided to the population of Catalonia (Spain). This is a pioneering initiative in Spain and is aligned with the most advanced countries in terms of policies of transparency and accountability. Copyright © 2016 SESPAS. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

A Shared Decision-Making System for Diabetes Medication Choice Utilizing Electronic Health Record Data.

Science.gov (United States)

Wang, Yu; Li, Peng-Fei; Tian, Yu; Ren, Jing-Jing; Li, Jing-Song

2017-09-01

The use of a shared decision-making (SDM) process in antihyperglycemic medication strategy decisions is necessary due to the complexity of the conditions of diabetes patients. Knowledge of guidelines is used as decision aids in clinical situations, and during this process, no patient health conditions are considered. In this paper, we propose an SDM system framework for type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients that not only contains knowledge abstracted from guidelines but also employs a multilabel classification model that uses class-imbalanced electronic health record (EHR) data and that aims to provide a recommended list of available antihyperglycemic medications to help physicians and patients have an SDM conversation. The use of EHR data to serve as a decision-support component in decision aids helps physicians and patients to reach a more intuitive understanding of current health conditions and allows the tailoring of the available knowledge to each patient, leading to a more effective SDM. Real-world data from 2542 T2DM inpatient EHRs were substituted by 77 features and eight output labels, i.e., eight antihyperglycemic medications, and these data were utilized to build and validate the recommendation model. The multilabel recommendation model exhibited stable performance in every single-label classification and showed the ability to predict minority positive cases in which the average recall value of the eight classes was 0.9898. As a whole multilabel classifier, the recommendation model demonstrated outstanding performance, with scores of 0.0941 for Hamming Loss, 0.7611 for Accuracy exam , 0.9664 for Recall exam , and 0.8269 for F exam .

Cultural targeting and tailoring of shared decision making technology: a theoretical framework for improving the effectiveness of patient decision aids in culturally diverse groups.

Science.gov (United States)

Alden, Dana L; Friend, John; Schapira, Marilyn; Stiggelbout, Anne

2014-03-01

Patient decision aids are known to positively impact outcomes critical to shared decision making (SDM), such as gist knowledge and decision preparedness. However, research on the potential improvement of these and other important outcomes through cultural targeting and tailoring of decision aids is very limited. This is the case despite extensive evidence supporting use of cultural targeting and tailoring to improve the effectiveness of health communications. Building on prominent psychological theory, we propose a two-stage framework incorporating cultural concepts into the design process for screening and treatment decision aids. The first phase recommends use of cultural constructs, such as collectivism and individualism, to differentially target patients whose cultures are known to vary on these dimensions. Decision aid targeting is operationalized through use of symbols and values that appeal to members of the given culture. Content dimensions within decision aids that appear particularly appropriate for targeting include surface level visual characteristics, language, beliefs, attitudes and values. The second phase of the framework is based on evidence that individuals vary in terms of how strongly cultural norms influence their approach to problem solving and decision making. In particular, the framework hypothesizes that differences in terms of access to cultural mindsets (e.g., access to interdependent versus independent self) can be measured up front and used to tailor decision aids. Thus, the second phase in the framework emphasizes the importance of not only targeting decision aid content, but also tailoring the information to the individual based on measurement of how strongly he/she is connected to dominant cultural mindsets. Overall, the framework provides a theory-based guide for researchers and practitioners who are interested in using cultural targeting and tailoring to develop and test decision aids that move beyond a "one-size fits all" approach

Feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of decision boxes on shared decision-making processes.

Science.gov (United States)

Giguere, Anik Mc; Labrecque, Michel; Légaré, France; Grad, Roland; Cauchon, Michel; Greenway, Matthew; Haynes, R Brian; Pluye, Pierre; Syed, Iqra; Banerjee, Debi; Carmichael, Pierre-Hugues; Martin, Mélanie

2015-02-25

Decision boxes (DBoxes) are two-page evidence summaries to prepare clinicians for shared decision making (SDM). We sought to assess the feasibility of a clustered Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) to evaluate their impact. A convenience sample of clinicians (nurses, physicians and residents) from six primary healthcare clinics who received eight DBoxes and rated their interest in the topic and satisfaction. After consultations, their patients rated their involvement in decision-making processes (SDM-Q-9 instrument). We measured clinic and clinician recruitment rates, questionnaire completion rates, patient eligibility rates, and estimated the RCT needed sample size. Among the 20 family medicine clinics invited to participate in this study, four agreed to participate, giving an overall recruitment rate of 20%. Of 148 clinicians invited to the study, 93 participated (63%). Clinicians rated an interest in the topics ranging 6.4-8.2 out of 10 (with 10 highest) and a satisfaction with DBoxes of 4 or 5 out of 5 (with 5 highest) for 81% DBoxes. For the future RCT, we estimated that a sample size of 320 patients would allow detecting a 9% mean difference in the SDM-Q-9 ratings between our two arms (0.02 ICC; 0.05 significance level; 80% power). Clinicians' recruitment and questionnaire completion rates support the feasibility of the planned RCT. The level of interest of participants for the DBox topics, and their level of satisfaction with the Dboxes demonstrate the acceptability of the intervention. Processes to recruit clinics and patients should be optimized.

Parent Communication Prompt to Increase Shared Decision-Making: A New Intervention Approach

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Lauren M. Hubner

2018-03-01

Full Text Available ObjectiveShared decision-making (SDM is the process by which patients, clinicians, and in pediatrics, parents/caregivers, discuss treatment options, communicate available evidence for or against the different options, share preferences and values, and eventually arrive at a joint decision. This study evaluates the use of a novel, universally applicable, SDM intervention, provided to parents, intended to promote engagement and participation with their child’s clinician.MethodsTwo-arm randomized controlled trial comparing the impact of a SDM-focused intervention prompt to a neutral comparison prompt on perception of SDM participation. Participants included English-speaking parents of children (0–17 years attending one Developmental-Behavioral Pediatric (DBP clinic and their child’s clinician. Prior to visit start, parents received either the intervention prompt encouraging engagement with the clinician in decision-making, or the comparison prompt reminding them to request a school/work excuse note if needed. After the visit, SDM was assessed by both parents and DBP clinicians. SDM was scored as present if the respondent answered “strongly agree” to all SDM-related items. Logistic regression tested effects of visit, child, parent, clinician characteristics, and intervention group status on parent-reported SDM. Cohen’s kappa assessed alignment between parent and clinician perceptions of SDM.ResultsOf 88 parents screened, 50 (61% met eligibility criteria and agreed to participate (intervention n = 26; comparison n = 24. Eligible participants (parents and clinicians for analysis completed the surveys with no missing data. Overall, SDM was present in 76% of parents and 34% of clinicians. With high rates of parent-reported SDM in both intervention and comparison groups, no main intervention effect was detected. Compared to the comparison group, there was greater alignment between parent and clinician perception of SDM in the

Barriers, facilitators and views about next steps to implementing supports for evidence-informed decision-making in health systems: a qualitative study.

Science.gov (United States)

Ellen, Moriah E; Léon, Grégory; Bouchard, Gisèle; Ouimet, Mathieu; Grimshaw, Jeremy M; Lavis, John N

2014-12-05

Mobilizing research evidence for daily decision-making is challenging for health system decision-makers. In a previous qualitative paper, we showed the current mix of supports that Canadian health-care organizations have in place and the ones that are perceived to be helpful to facilitate the use of research evidence in health system decision-making. Factors influencing the implementation of such supports remain poorly described in the literature. Identifying the barriers to and facilitators of different interventions is essential for implementation of effective, context-specific, supports for evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) in health systems. The purpose of this study was to identify (a) barriers and facilitators to implementing supports for EIDM in Canadian health-care organizations, (b) views about emerging development of supports for EIDM, and (c) views about the priorities to bridge the gaps in the current mix of supports that these organizations have in place. This qualitative study was conducted in three types of health-care organizations (regional health authorities, hospitals, and primary care practices) in two Canadian provinces (Ontario and Quebec). Fifty-seven in-depth semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with senior managers, library managers, and knowledge brokers from health-care organizations that have already undertaken strategic initiatives in knowledge translation. The interviews were taped, transcribed, and then analyzed thematically using NVivo 9 qualitative data analysis software. Limited resources (i.e., money or staff), time constraints, and negative attitudes (or resistance) toward change were the most frequently identified barriers to implementing supports for EIDM. Genuine interest from health system decision-makers, notably their willingness to invest money and resources and to create a knowledge translation culture over time in health-care organizations, was the most frequently identified facilitator to

The SDM 3 Circle Model: A Literature Synthesis and Adaptation for Shared Decision Making in the Hospital.

Science.gov (United States)

Rennke, Stephanie; Yuan, Patrick; Monash, Brad; Blankenburg, Rebecca; Chua, Ian; Harman, Stephanie; Sakai, Debbie S; Khan, Adeena; Hilton, Joan F; Shieh, Lisa; Satterfield, Jason

2017-12-01

Patient engagement through shared decision-making (SDM) is increasingly seen as a key component for patient safety, patient satisfaction, and quality of care. Current SDM models do not adequately account for medical and environmental contexts, which may influence medical decisions in the hospital. We identified leading SDM models and reviews to inductively construct a novel SDM model appropriate for the inpatient setting. A team of medicine and pediatric hospitalists reviewed the literature to integrate core SDM concepts and processes and iteratively constructed a synthesized draft model. We then solicited broad SDM expert feedback on the draft model for validation and further refinement. The SDM 3 Circle Model identifies 3 core categories of variables that dynamically interact within an "environmental frame." The resulting Venn diagram includes overlapping circles for (1) patient/family, (2) provider/team, and (3) medical context. The environmental frame includes all external, contextual factors that may influence any of the 3 circles. Existing multistep SDM process models were then rearticulated and contextualized to illustrate how a shared decision might be made. The SDM 3 Circle Model accounts for important environmental and contextual characteristics that vary across settings. The visual emphasis generated by each "circle" and by the environmental frame direct attention to often overlooked interactive forces and has the potential to more precisely define, promote, and improve SDM. This model provides a framework to develop interventions to improve quality and patient safety through SDM and patient engagement for hospitalists. © 2017 Society of Hospital Medicine.

Decision-making of older patients in context of the doctor-patient relationship: a typology ranging from "self-determined" to "doctor-trusting" patients.

Science.gov (United States)

Wrede-Sach, Jennifer; Voigt, Isabel; Diederichs-Egidi, Heike; Hummers-Pradier, Eva; Dierks, Marie-Luise; Junius-Walker, Ulrike

2013-01-01

Background. This qualitative study aims to gain insight into the perceptions and experiences of older patients with regard to sharing health care decisions with their general practitioners. Patients and Methods. Thirty-four general practice patients (≥70 years) were asked about their preferences and experiences concerning shared decision making with their doctors using qualitative semistructured interviews. All interviews were analysed according to principles of content analysis. The resulting categories were then arranged into a classification grid to develop a typology of preferences for participating in decision-making processes. Results. Older patients generally preferred to make decisions concerning everyday life rather than medical decisions, which they preferred to leave to their doctors. We characterised eight different patient types based on four interdependent positions (self-determination, adherence, information seeking, and trust). Experiences of a good doctor-patient relationship were associated with trust, reliance on the doctor for information and decision making, and adherence. Conclusion. Owing to the varied patient decision-making types, it is not easy for doctors to anticipate the desired level of patient involvement. However, the decision matter and the self-determination of patients provide good starting points in preparing the ground for shared decision making. A good relationship with the doctor facilitates satisfying decision-making experiences.

The Assessment of Burden of COPD (ABC) tool : a shared decision-making instrument that is predictive of healthcare costs

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Rutten-vanMolken, Maureen P. H. M.; Goossens, Lucas M A; Boland, Melinde R. S.; Donkers, Bas; Jonker, Marcel F.; Slok, Annerika H. M.; Salome, Philippe L.; van Schayck, Constant; In 't Veen, Johannes C C M; Stolk, Elly A.

2017-01-01

Background: The Assessment of Burden of COPD (ABC) tool is an instrument that supports shared decision making between patients and physicians. It includes a coloured balloon diagram to visualize a patient’s scores on a questionnaire about the experienced burden of COPD and several objective severity

[Shared decision-making based on equal information. Patient guidelines as a tool for patient counseling].

Science.gov (United States)

Sänger, Sylvia; Kopp, Ina; Englert, Gerhard; Brunsmann, Frank; Quadder, Bernd; Ollenschläger, Günter

2007-06-15

In discussions on the quality of cross-sectorial health-care services high importance is attributed to patient education and patient counseling, with guideline-based patient information being considered a crucial tool. Guideline-based patient information is supposed to serve patients as a decision-making basis and, in addition, to also support the implementation of the guidelines themselves. The article highlights how patient guidelines for National Disease Management Guidelines in Germany--within the scope of patient education and patient counseling--may provide a uniform information platform for physicians and patients aiming to promote shared decision-making. The authors will also address the issue which contents should be included in patient guidelines in order to meet these requirements and which measures are required to review their quality. The present paper continues the series of articles on the Program for German National Disease Management Guidelines.

Creating Shared Mental Models: The Support of Visual Language

Science.gov (United States)

Landman, Renske B.; van den Broek, Egon L.; Gieskes, José F. B.

Cooperative design involves multiple stakeholders that often hold different ideas of the problem, the ways to solve it, and to its solutions (i.e., mental models; MM). These differences can result in miscommunication, misunderstanding, slower decision making processes, and less chance on cooperative decisions. In order to facilitate the creation of a shared mental model (sMM), visual languages (VL) are often used. However, little scientific foundation is behind this choice. To determine whether or not this gut feeling is justified, a research was conducted in which various stakeholders had to cooperatively redesign a process chain, with and without VL. To determine whether or not a sMM was created, scores on agreement in individual MM, communication, and cooperation were analyzed. The results confirmed the assumption that VL can indeed play an important role in the creation of sMM and, hence, can aid the processes of cooperative design and engineering.

Evolving the multiple roles of 'patients' in health-care research: reflections after involvement in a trial of shared decision-making.

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Thornton, H.; Edwards, A.; Elwyn, G.

2003-01-01

OBJECTIVE: This paper offers 'consumer-led' reflections by steering group members of a patient-centred research study involving consumer advocates, patients' associations and patients, throughout the whole study, from pre- to post-study phases. ORIGINAL STUDY DESIGN: The study: 'Shared decision

Knowledge Management Technology for Decision Support: an empirical examination

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Meliha Handzic

2001-11-01

Full Text Available This paper reports the results of an empirical examination of the effectiveness of one type of knowledge management technology, namely 'contextual knowledge repository', for supporting individual decision makers in a predictive judgement task context. 31 volunteer subjects participated in the study. The results indicate that a given technology was fairly useful, but insufficient to maximally enhance individual decision making. On one hand, subjects were found to extract more knowledge and make significantly smaller decision errors than their notional naive counterparts. On the other hand, subjects tended to extract less knowledge and make significantly larger decision errors compared to notional optimal counterparts. These findings suggest that individuals could potentially benefit from those knowledge management technologies that would provide additional explicit analytical and procedural knowledge, or those that would facilitate sharing of tacit knowledge through interaction with others. Future research is necessary to address these issues.

Sharing mates and nest boxes is associated with female "friendship" in European starlings, Sturnus vulgaris.

Science.gov (United States)

Henry, Laurence; Bourguet, Cécile; Coulon, Marion; Aubry, Christine; Hausberger, Martine

2013-02-01

Breeding decisions in birds involve both mate and nest choice, and there is increasing evidence that social influences may modulate individual choices. Female preferences may be affected by other females' preferences and mutual choice cannot always be excluded, which makes the whole pattern more complex than assumed by most sexual selection models. Social transmission may be facilitated by particular social bonds, therefore prebreeding social networks may influence later mate choices. The other case where females share mate or resources is polygyny, generally viewed to only benefit males. If mutual benefits may arise then mechanisms should evolve to reduce the reproductive cost for females such as to reduce the cost of aggression by sharing their mate with a preferred same-sex social partner. We tested the hypothesis that females' mating decisions may be influenced by the prebreeding social network and that social partner relations established prior to breeding may share decisions (mate/sites) in a facultatively polygynous species, the European starling. Two experiments were designed to test the relative importance of male or nest by following the whole dynamics of the breeding cycle from the prebreeding period until mate and nest selection. In both cases socially isolated females tended to be excluded from breeding, while prebreeding social partners tended to share mates and to nest in close proximity, mate copying leading in some case to polygyny. The final pattern resulted both from female "likes and dislikes" and male preferences for some females. Aggressive interactions between females were rare. Vocal sharing between females may have been a clue for males as to the degree of social integration of these females. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved

Involvement as inclusion? Shared decision-making in social work practice in Israel: a qualitative account.

Science.gov (United States)

Levin, Lia

2015-03-01

Shared decision-making (SDM), a representation of shared knowledge and power between social workers and their clients, is gaining popularity and prevalence in social services around the world. In many senses, SDM reflects values traditionally associated with social work and service provision, such as equality and anti-discrimination. In the complex context of social problem-solving, however, the relationship between SDM, social workers and their clients is multi-faceted and deserves particular attention. The current study examined SDM and the dilemmas it entails through interviews conducted in 2012 with 77 Israeli social workers and policy makers whose responses were analysed according to the guiding principles of descriptive phenomenological content analysis and dialogical commonality. Participants' responses represent notions of hope, change, identity and choice. Findings are discussed in correspondence with current and recent trends in Israeli social services, and the social work profession in Israel. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Does training family physicians in shared decision making promote optimal use of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections? Study protocol of a pilot clustered randomised controlled trial

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Côté Luc

2007-11-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background In North America, although it varies according to the specific type of acute respiratory infections (ARI, use of antibiotics is estimated to be well above the expected prevalence of bacterial infections. The objective of this pilot clustered randomized controlled trial (RCT is to assess the feasibility of a larger clustered RCT aiming at evaluating the impact of DECISION+, a continuing professional development (CPD program in shared decision making, on the optimal use of antibiotics in the context of ARI. Methods/design This pilot study is a cluster RCT conducted with family physicians from Family Medicine Groups (FMG in the Quebec City area, Canada. Participating FMG are randomised to an immediate DECISION+ group, a CPD program in shared decision making, (experimental group, or a delayed DECISION+ group (control group. Data collection involves recruiting five patients consulting for ARI per physician from both study groups before (Phase 1 and after (Phase 2 exposure of the experimental group to the DECISION+ program, and after exposure of the control group to the DECISION+ program (Phase 3. The primary outcome measures to assess the feasibility of a larger RCT include: 1 proportion of contacted FMG that agree to participate; 2 proportion of recruited physicians who participate in the DECISION+ program; 3 level of satisfaction of physicians regarding DECISION+; and 4 proportion of missing data in each data collection phase. Levels of agreement of the patient-physician dyad on the Decisional Conflict Scale and physicians' prescription profile for ARI are performed as secondary outcome measures. Discussion This study protocol is informative for researchers and clinicians interested in designing and/or conducting clustered RCT with FMG regarding training of physicians in shared decision making. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00354315

College Students, Shared Decision Making, and the Appropriate Use of Antibiotics for Respiratory Tract Infections: A Systematic Literature Review

Science.gov (United States)

Blyer, Kristina; Hulton, Linda

2016-01-01

Objective: This systematic review examines shared decision making to promote the appropriate use of antibiotics for college students with respiratory tract infections. Participants/Methods: CINAL, Cochrane, PubMed, EBSCO, and PsycNET were searched in October 2014 using the following criteria: English language, human subjects, peer-reviewed, shared…

Instant messenger-facilitated knowledge sharing and team performance

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Ou, C.X.J.; Davison, R.M.; Leung, D.

2014-01-01

The instant messenger (IM) is frequently encountered as a facilitator of communication in both social and working contexts. Nevertheless, there are concerns about the extent to which IMs bring organizational benefits, thereby overcoming interruptions to work. In this study, we focus on how IM tools

Shared governance. From vision to reality.

Science.gov (United States)

Westrope, R A; Vaughn, L; Bott, M; Taunton, R L

1995-12-01

Quality patient care is best provided by competent clinical staff members who are committed to their work, organizational values, and goals, and who maintain employment over time. Shared governance has provided the framework for clinical nurses to become more committed to their practice through decision making and to assume accountability for the outcomes of their decisions. At a tertiary teaching facility, shared governance resulted in increased job satisfaction, commitment, and retention among staff nurses. The authors describe the journey from creation of the shared governance vision to reality, and the impact of the changes.

User-Centered Design, Experience, and Usability of an Electronic Consent User Interface to Facilitate Informed Decision-Making in an HIV Clinic.

Science.gov (United States)

Ramos, S Raquel

2017-11-01

Health information exchange is the electronic accessibility and transferability of patient medical records across various healthcare settings and providers. In some states, patients have to formally give consent to allow their medical records to be electronically shared. The purpose of this study was to apply a novel user-centered, multistep, multiframework approach to design and test an electronic consent user interface, so patients with HIV can make more informed decisions about electronically sharing their health information. This study consisted of two steps. Step 1 was a cross-sectional, descriptive, qualitative study that used user-centric design interviews to create the user interface. This informed Step 2. Step 2 consisted of a one group posttest to examine perceptions of usefulness, ease of use, preference, and comprehension of a health information exchange electronic consent user interface. More than half of the study population had college experience, but challenges remained with overall comprehension regarding consent. The user interface was not independently successful, suggesting that in addition to an electronic consent user interface, human interaction may also be necessary to address the complexities associated with consenting to electronically share health information. Comprehension is key factor in the ability to make informed decisions.

Increasing public awareness and facilitating behavior change: Two guiding heuristics

Science.gov (United States)

Maibach, E.

2016-12-01

If there is a single aspiration that unifies the professionals who work on the challenges associated with global change, it is likely their desire to see policy makers, business managers and members of the public make decisions that are better informed by the realities of what we know about how to stabilize the climate and prevent needless harm to people and eco-systems. This calls an obvious question: What can we - as scientists and science organizations - to do more effectively promote evidence-based decision-making and actions by important decision-makers? In this talk I will distinguish between two related challenges: more effectively sharing what we know (i.e., improving our communication); and more effectively helping decision-makers take helpful actions (i.e., improving our efforts to facilitate behavior change). Drawing on both theory and empirical evidence in communication science, behavioral science and other related social sciences, I suggest two guiding heurstics - one for each of the two challenges - that will help scientists and science organizations improve the impact of their outreach efforts. To more effectively share what we know, we need "simple clear messages, repeated often, by a variety of trusted sources." To help people convert their good intentions into effective actions, we need to do more to "make the behaviors we are promoting easy, fun and popular." I refer to each of these as "heuristics" in the sense that they organize a relatively large amount of prescriptive information into a relatively easy to use method or process. In this talk, I will unpack each of these heurtistics with the aim of making them practical for all in attendance.

Assessing Practitioners’ and Patients’ Needs Regarding Shared Decision-Making and Decision Aids

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Michiel Hageman

2016-04-01

Full Text Available Background: As part of the process of developing a decision aid for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS according to the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, we were interested in the level of ‘decisional conflict’ of hand surgeons and patients with CTS. This study addresses the null hypothesis that there is no difference between surgeon and patient decisional conflict with respect to test and treatment options for CTS. Secondary analyses assess the impact of patient and physician demographics and the strength of the patient-physician relationship on decisional conflict.   Methods: One-hundred-twenty-three observers of the Science of Variation Group (SOVG and 84 patients with carpal tunnel syndrome completed a survey regarding the Decisional Conflict Scale. Patients also filled out the Pain Self-efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ and the Patient Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9.   Results: On average, patients had significantly greater decision conflict and scored higher on most subscales of the decisional conflict scale than hand surgeons.Factors associated with greater decision conflict were specific hand surgeon, less self-efficacy (confidence that one can achieve one’s goals in spite of pain, and higher PDRQ (relationship between patient and doctor. Surgeons from Europe have--on average--significantly more decision conflict than surgeons in the United States of America.   Conclusions: Patients with CTS have more decision conflict than hand surgeons. Decision aids might help narrow this gap in decisional conflict.

On the verge of shared decision making in Israel: Overview and future directions.

Science.gov (United States)

Karnieli-Miller, Orit; Miron-Shatz, Talya; Siegal, Gil; Zisman-Ilani, Yaara

2017-06-01

Israel has a universal-national healthcare system and a progressive health policy legislation which, together, provide its residents with high-level healthcare services and either free or highly subsidized coverage without any pre-existing conditions. However, it is surprising that shared decision making (SDM) practices and policy are not an integral part of Israel's healthcare system. The purpose of this overview is to describe the gap between the organizational-infrastructure compatibility of Israel's universal healthcare policy and the efforts needed to advance SDM as part of routine healthcare practice. Review of recent research and education initiatives will be described as well as recommendations for policy and clinical practice. Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

Facilitating Secure Sharing of Personal Health Data in the Cloud.

Science.gov (United States)

Thilakanathan, Danan; Calvo, Rafael A; Chen, Shiping; Nepal, Surya; Glozier, Nick

2016-05-27

Internet-based applications are providing new ways of promoting health and reducing the cost of care. Although data can be kept encrypted in servers, the user does not have the ability to decide whom the data are shared with. Technically this is linked to the problem of who owns the data encryption keys required to decrypt the data. Currently, cloud service providers, rather than users, have full rights to the key. In practical terms this makes the users lose full control over their data. Trust and uptake of these applications can be increased by allowing patients to feel in control of their data, generally stored in cloud-based services. This paper addresses this security challenge by providing the user a way of controlling encryption keys independently of the cloud service provider. We provide a secure and usable system that enables a patient to share health information with doctors and specialists. We contribute a secure protocol for patients to share their data with doctors and others on the cloud while keeping complete ownership. We developed a simple, stereotypical health application and carried out security tests, performance tests, and usability tests with both students and doctors (N=15). We developed the health application as an app for Android mobile phones. We carried out the usability tests on potential participants and medical professionals. Of 20 participants, 14 (70%) either agreed or strongly agreed that they felt safer using our system. Using mixed methods, we show that participants agreed that privacy and security of health data are important and that our system addresses these issues. We presented a security protocol that enables patients to securely share their eHealth data with doctors and nurses and developed a secure and usable system that enables patients to share mental health information with doctors.

Evaluation of a Shared Decision-Making Intervention on the Utilization of Evidence-Based Psychotherapy in a VA Outpatient PTSD Clinic.

Science.gov (United States)

Hessinger, Jonathan D; London, Melissa J; Baer, Sheila M

2017-03-13

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has continued to emphasize the availability, access, and utilization of high quality mental health care particularly in the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). While dissemination and availability of evidence-based psychotherapies (EBPs) have only increased, treatment engagement and utilization have continued to be oft-noted challenges. Administrators, researchers, and individual clinicians have continued to develop and explore novel systemic and individualized interventions to address these issues. Pilot studies utilizing shared decision-making models to aid in veteran treatment selection have demonstrated the impact this approach may have on selection of and engagement in EBPs for PTSD. Based on these promising studies, a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) outpatient PTSD clinic began to implement a shared-decision making intervention as part of a clinic redesign. In seeking to evaluate the impact of this intervention, archival clinical data from 1,056 veterans were reviewed by the authors for rates of treatment selection, EBP initiation, session attendance, and EBP completion. Time elapsed from consult until EBP initiation was also computed by the authors. These variables were then compared on the basis of whether the veteran received the shared-decision making intervention. Veterans who received the intervention were more likely to select and thus initiate an EBP for PTSD sooner than veterans who did not receive this intervention. Veterans, whether receiving the intervention or not, did not differ in therapy session attendance and completion. Implications of these findings and directions for future study are further discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).

Shared Decision-Making in Oncology - A Qualitative Analysis of Healthcare Providers' Views on Current Practice.

Science.gov (United States)

Frerichs, Wiebke; Hahlweg, Pola; Müller, Evamaria; Adis, Christine; Scholl, Isabelle

2016-01-01

Despite an increased awareness of shared decision-making (SDM) and its prominent position on the health policy agenda, its implementation in routine care remains a challenge in Germany. In order to overcome this challenge, it is important to understand healthcare providers' views regarding SDM and to take their perspectives and opinions into account in the development of an implementation program. The present study aimed at exploring a) the attitudes of different healthcare providers regarding SDM in oncology and b) their experiences with treatment decisions in daily practice. A qualitative study was conducted using focus groups and individual interviews with different healthcare providers at the University Cancer Center Hamburg, Germany. Focus groups and interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using conventional content analysis and descriptive statistics. N = 4 focus groups with a total of N = 25 participants and N = 17 individual interviews were conducted. Attitudes regarding SDM varied greatly between the different participants, especially concerning the definition of SDM, the attitude towards the degree of patient involvement in decision-making and assumptions about when SDM should take place. Experiences on how treatment decisions are currently made varied. Negative experiences included time and structural constraints, and a lack of (multidisciplinary) communication. Positive experiences comprised informed patients, involvement of relatives and a good physician-patient relationship. The results show that German healthcare providers in oncology have a range of attitudes that currently function as barriers towards the implementation of SDM. Also, their experiences on how decision-making is currently done reveal difficulties in actively involving patients in decision-making processes. It will be crucial to take these attitudes and experiences seriously and to subsequently disentangle existing misconceptions in future implementation programs.

Decision-Making of Older Patients in Context of the Doctor-Patient Relationship: A Typology Ranging from “Self-Determined” to “Doctor-Trusting” Patients

Science.gov (United States)

Voigt, Isabel; Diederichs-Egidi, Heike; Hummers-Pradier, Eva; Dierks, Marie-Luise; Junius-Walker, Ulrike

2013-01-01

Background. This qualitative study aims to gain insight into the perceptions and experiences of older patients with regard to sharing health care decisions with their general practitioners. Patients and Methods. Thirty-four general practice patients (≥70 years) were asked about their preferences and experiences concerning shared decision making with their doctors using qualitative semistructured interviews. All interviews were analysed according to principles of content analysis. The resulting categories were then arranged into a classification grid to develop a typology of preferences for participating in decision-making processes. Results. Older patients generally preferred to make decisions concerning everyday life rather than medical decisions, which they preferred to leave to their doctors. We characterised eight different patient types based on four interdependent positions (self-determination, adherence, information seeking, and trust). Experiences of a good doctor-patient relationship were associated with trust, reliance on the doctor for information and decision making, and adherence. Conclusion. Owing to the varied patient decision-making types, it is not easy for doctors to anticipate the desired level of patient involvement. However, the decision matter and the self-determination of patients provide good starting points in preparing the ground for shared decision making. A good relationship with the doctor facilitates satisfying decision-making experiences. PMID:23691317

Sharing and re-use of phylogenetic trees (and associated data) to facilitate synthesis.

Science.gov (United States)

Stoltzfus, Arlin; O'Meara, Brian; Whitacre, Jamie; Mounce, Ross; Gillespie, Emily L; Kumar, Sudhir; Rosauer, Dan F; Vos, Rutger A

2012-10-22

Recently, various evolution-related journals adopted policies to encourage or require archiving of phylogenetic trees and associated data. Such attention to practices that promote sharing of data reflects rapidly improving information technology, and rapidly expanding potential to use this technology to aggregate and link data from previously published research. Nevertheless, little is known about current practices, or best practices, for publishing trees and associated data so as to promote re-use. Here we summarize results of an ongoing analysis of current practices for archiving phylogenetic trees and associated data, current practices of re-use, and current barriers to re-use. We find that the technical infrastructure is available to support rudimentary archiving, but the frequency of archiving is low. Currently, most phylogenetic knowledge is not easily re-used due to a lack of archiving, lack of awareness of best practices, and lack of community-wide standards for formatting data, naming entities, and annotating data. Most attempts at data re-use seem to end in disappointment. Nevertheless, we find many positive examples of data re-use, particularly those that involve customized species trees generated by grafting to, and pruning from, a much larger tree. The technologies and practices that facilitate data re-use can catalyze synthetic and integrative research. However, success will require engagement from various stakeholders including individual scientists who produce or consume shareable data, publishers, policy-makers, technology developers and resource-providers. The critical challenges for facilitating re-use of phylogenetic trees and associated data, we suggest, include: a broader commitment to public archiving; more extensive use of globally meaningful identifiers; development of user-friendly technology for annotating, submitting, searching, and retrieving data and their metadata; and development of a minimum reporting standard (MIAPA) indicating

Service users' experiences of participation in decision making in mental health services.

Science.gov (United States)

Dahlqvist Jönsson, P; Schön, U-K; Rosenberg, D; Sandlund, M; Svedberg, P

2015-11-01

Despite the potential positive impact of shared decision making on service users knowledge and experience of decisional conflict, there is a lack of qualitative research on how participation in decision making is promoted from the perspective of psychiatric service users. This study highlights the desire of users to participate more actively in decision making and demonstrates that persons with SMI struggle to be seen as competent and equal partners in decision-making situations. Those interviewed did not feel that their strengths, abilities and needs were being recognized, which resulted in a feeling of being omitted from involvement in decision-making situations. The service users describe some essential conditions that could work to promote participation in decision making. These included having personal support, having access to knowledge, being involved in a dialogue and clarity about responsibilities. Mental health nurses can play an essential role for developing and implementing shared decision making as a tool to promote recovery-oriented mental health services. Service user participation in decision making is considered an essential component of recovery-oriented mental health services. Despite the potential of shared decision making to impact service users knowledge and positively influence their experience of decisional conflict, there is a lack of qualitative research on how participation in decision making is promoted from the perspective of psychiatric service users. In order to develop concrete methods that facilitate shared decision making, there is a need for increased knowledge regarding the users' own perspective. The aim of this study was to explore users' experiences of participation in decisions in mental health services in Sweden, and the kinds of support that may promote participation. Constructivist Grounded Theory (CGT) was utilized to analyse group and individual interviews with 20 users with experience of serious mental illness. The core

Feasibility of a randomised trial of a continuing medical education program in shared decision-making on the use of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections in primary care: the DECISION+ pilot trial

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Laurier Claudine

2011-01-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background The misuse and limited effectiveness of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections (ARIs are well documented, and current approaches targeting physicians or patients to improve appropriate use have had limited effect. Shared decision-making could be a promising strategy to improve appropriate antibiotic use for ARIs, but very little is known about its implementation processes and outcomes in clinical settings. In this matter, pilot studies have played a key role in health science research over the past years in providing information for the planning, justification, and/or refinement of larger studies. The objective of our study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the study design, procedures, and intervention of the DECISION+ program, a continuing medical education program in shared decision-making among family physicians and their patients on the optimal use of antibiotics for treating ARIs in primary care. Methods A pilot clustered randomised trial was conducted. Family medicine groups (FMGs were randomly assigned, to either the DECISION+ program, which included three 3-hour workshops over a four- to six-month period, or a control group that had a delayed exposure to the program. Results Among 21 FMGs contacted, 5 (24% agreed to participate in the pilot study. A total of 39 family physicians (18 in the two experimental and 21 in the three control FMGs and their 544 patients consulting for an ARI were recruited. The proportion of recruited family physicians who participated in all three workshops was 46% (50% for the experimental group and 43% for the control group, and the overall mean level of satisfaction regarding the workshops was 94%. Conclusions This trial, while aiming to demonstrate the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a larger study, has identified important opportunities for improving the design of a definitive trial. This pilot trial is informative for researchers and clinicians

Perceptions of Shared Decision Making Among Patients with Spinal Cord Injuries/Disorders.

Science.gov (United States)

Locatelli, Sara M; Etingen, Bella; Heinemann, Allen; Neumann, Holly DeMark; Miskovic, Ana; Chen, David; LaVela, Sherri L

2016-01-01

Background: Individuals with spinal cord injuries/disorders (SCI/D) are interested in, and benefit from, shared decision making (SDM). Objective: To explore SDM among individuals with SCI/D and how demographics and health and SCI/D characteristics are related to SDM. Method: Individuals with SCI/D who were at least 1 year post injury, resided in the Chicago metropolitan area, and received SCI care at a Veterans Affairs (VA; n = 124) or an SCI Model Systems facility ( n = 326) completed a mailed survey measuring demographics, health and SCI/D characteristics, physical and mental health status, and perceptions of care, including SDM, using the Combined Outcome Measure for Risk Communication and Treatment Decision-Making Effectiveness (COMRADE) that assesses decision-making effectiveness (effectiveness) and risk communication (communication). Bivariate analyses and multiple linear regression were used to identify variables associated with SDM. Results: Participants were mostly male (83%) and White (70%) and were an average age of 54 years ( SD = 14.3). Most had traumatic etiology, 44% paraplegia, and 49% complete injury. Veteran/civilian status and demographics were unrelated to scores. Bivariate analyses showed that individuals with tetraplegia had better effectiveness scores than those with paraplegia. Better effectiveness was correlated with better physical and mental health; better communication was correlated with better mental health. Multiple linear regressions showed that tetraplegia, better physical health, and better mental health were associated with better effectiveness, and better mental health was associated with better communication. Conclusion: SCI/D and health characteristics were the only variables associated with SDM. Interventions to increase engagement in SDM and provider attention to SDM may be beneficial, especially for individuals with paraplegia or in poorer physical and mental health.

Cynefin as Reference Framework to Facilitate Insight and Decision-Making in Complex Contexts of Biomedical Research

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Gerd Kempermann

2017-11-01

Full Text Available The Cynefin scheme is a concept of knowledge management, originally devised to support decision making in management, but more generally applicable to situations, in which complexity challenges the quality of insight, prediction, and decision. Despite the fact that life itself, and especially the brain and its diseases, are complex to the extent that complexity could be considered their cardinal feature, complex problems in biomedicine are often treated as if they were actually not more than the complicated sum of solvable sub-problems. Because of the emergent properties of complex contexts this is not correct. With a set of clear criteria Cynefin helps to set apart complex problems from “simple/obvious,” “complicated,” “chaotic,” and “disordered” contexts in order to avoid misinterpreting the relevant causality structures. The distinction comes with the insight, which specific kind of knowledge is possible in each of these categories and what are the consequences for resulting decisions and actions. From student's theses over the publication and grant writing process to research politics, misinterpretation of complexity can have problematic or even dangerous consequences, especially in clinical contexts. Conceptualization of problems within a straightforward reference language like Cynefin improves clarity and stringency within projects and facilitates communication and decision-making about them.

A Data Sharing Story

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Mercè Crosas

2012-01-01

Full Text Available From the early days of modern science through this century of Big Data, data sharing has enabled some of the greatest advances in science. In the digital age, technology can facilitate more effective and efficient data sharing and preservation practices, and provide incentives for making data easily accessible among researchers. At the Institute for Quantitative Social Science at Harvard University, we have developed an open-source software to share, cite, preserve, discover and analyze data, named the Dataverse Network. We share here the project’s motivation, its growth and successes, and likely evolution.

Efficacy of shared decision-making on treatment adherence of patients with bipolar disorder: a cluster randomized trial (ShareD-BD).

Science.gov (United States)

Samalin, L; Honciuc, M; Boyer, L; de Chazeron, I; Blanc, O; Abbar, M; Llorca, P M

2018-04-13

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a model of interaction between doctors and patients in which both actors contribute to the medical decision-making process. SDM has raised great interest in mental healthcare over the last decade, as it is considered a fundamental part of patient-centered care. However, there is no research evaluating the efficacy of SDM compared to usual care (CAU), as it relates to quality of care and more specifically treatment adherence, in bipolar disorder (BD). This is a 12-month multi-centre, cluster-randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of SDM to CAU. Adult BD patients (n = 300) will be eligible after stabilization for at least 4 weeks following an acute mood episode. The intervention will consist of applying the standardized SDM process as developed by the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute in order to choose the maintenance treatment of BD. A multidisciplinary team developed a decision aid "choose my long-term treatment with my doctor" for BD patients to clarify possible therapeutic options. Primary outcome will assess the patient's level of adherence (based on hetero-evaluation) of ongoing treatment at 12 months. Secondary outcomes will assess the difference between the 2 groups of patients in terms of adherence to maintenance drug therapy based on other measures (self-assessment scale and plasma levels of mood stabilizers). Additionally, other dimensions will be assessed: decisional conflict, satisfaction with care and involvement in decision making, beliefs about treatment, therapeutic relationship, knowledge about information for medical decision and clinical outcomes (depression, mania, functioning and quality of life). The primary endpoint will be analysed without adjustment by comparison of adherence scores between the two groups using Student t-tests or Mann-Whitney tests according to the variable distribution. A set of secondary analyses will be adjusted for covariates of clinical interest using generalized linear

Prostate cancer screening and shared decision-making preferences among African-American members of the Prince Hall Masons.

Science.gov (United States)

Williams, Randi M; Zincke, Nicole L; Turner, Ralph O; Davis, Jackson L; Davis, Kimberly M; Schwartz, Marc D; Johnson, Lenora; Kerner, Jon F; Taylor, Kathryn L

2008-10-01

Shared decision making (SDM) is recommended as one method to assist men in making an informed decision about prostate cancer screening (PCS). SDM preferences for PCS have not been evaluated among African-American (AA) men. Given AA men's increased risk and the uncertainty surrounding screening, it is critical to determine how to assist AA men in making an informed decision. We assessed the extent to which a sample of AA men wished to engage in SDM regarding PCS and the demographic and psychological characteristics associated with SDM preferences. Participants completed a telephone interview that covered demographic and medical information, SDM preferences, PCS knowledge, decisional conflict, and satisfaction with previous screening decisions. Subjects included 286 AA men aged 40-70, who were members of a Masonic organization. Fifty-seven percent preferred SDM, 36% preferred to make their own decision, and 7% wanted their doctor to decide. A higher level of education and older age were associated with preferring SDM (p<0.05), while men with greater PCS knowledge were more likely to prefer to make the decision independently (p<0.05). Results suggest that physicians need to be prepared to discuss PCS with their patients. Further, more attention may be needed to engage younger, less educated, and less knowledgeable men as they may be less likely to discuss PCS. This understanding of AA men's preferences for PCS decisions helps to clarify the issues that health professionals need to consider when attempting to assist AA men in making a PCS decision. Copyright (c) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Binary decision diagrams by shared rewriting

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Pol, J. van de; Zantema, H.

2000-01-01

BDDs provide an established technique for propositional formula manipulation. In this paper we re-develope the basic BDD theory using standard rewriting techniques. Since a BDD is a DAG instead of a tree we need a notion of shared rewriting and develope appropriate theory. A rewriting system is

On the Development of a Computing Infrastructure that Facilitates IPPD from a Decision-Based Design Perspective

Science.gov (United States)

Hale, Mark A.; Craig, James I.; Mistree, Farrokh; Schrage, Daniel P.

1995-01-01

Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) embodies the simultaneous application of both system and quality engineering methods throughout an iterative design process. The use of IPPD results in the time-conscious, cost-saving development of engineering systems. Georgia Tech has proposed the development of an Integrated Design Engineering Simulator that will merge Integrated Product and Process Development with interdisciplinary analysis techniques and state-of-the-art computational technologies. To implement IPPD, a Decision-Based Design perspective is encapsulated in an approach that focuses on the role of the human designer in product development. The approach has two parts and is outlined in this paper. First, an architecture, called DREAMS, is being developed that facilitates design from a decision-based perspective. Second, a supporting computing infrastructure, called IMAGE, is being designed. The current status of development is given and future directions are outlined.

Kwaabana: File sharing for rural networks

CSIR Research Space (South Africa)

Johnson, DL

2013-12-01

Full Text Available , Zambia. The results show that our localized file sharing service facilitates reliable sharing amongst rural users. Importantly, it also removes the cost barrier present for similar Internet-based services. We outline the process used by Kwaabana...

Relationship between health literacy of cancer patients and shared clinical decision-making in a Middle East country

OpenAIRE

Khammarnia, Mohammad; Setoodezadeh, Fatemeh; Ansari-Moghadam, Alireza; Yusefi, Alireza; Eskandari, Monire; Ranjbar, Arezo Alinejad; Peyvand, Mostafa

2018-01-01

Introduction: The study aimed to investigate the relationship between Health literacy (HL) and shared clinical decision-making among cancer patients in Iran. Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was performed in the south of Iran between January and March of 2017. The study's population was all patients in the southeast of Iran. From here, 500 patients were selected as the study sample by the stratified sampling method. Two standard questionnaires were selected for data-gathering. ...

Veterans Like Me: Formative evaluation of a patient decision aid design.

Science.gov (United States)

Gibson, Bryan; Butler, Jorie; Doyon, Katherine; Ellington, Lee; Bray, Bruce E; Zeng, Qing

2017-07-01

Patient decision aids are tools intended to facilitate shared decision-making. Currently development of a patient decision aid is resource intensive: it requires a decision-specific review of the scientific literature by experts to ascertain the potential outcomes under different treatments. The goal of this project was to conduct a formative evaluation of a generalizable, scalable decision aid component we call Veterans Like Me (VLme). VLme mines EHR data to present the outcomes of individuals "like you" on different treatments to the user. These outcome are presented through a combination of an icon array and simulated narratives. Twenty-six patients participated in semi-structured interviews intended to elicit feedback on the tool's functional and interface design. The interview focused on the filters users desired with which to make cases similar to them, the kinds of outcomes they wanted presented, and their envisioned use of the tool. The interview also elicited participants information needs and salient factors related to the therapeutic decision. The interview transcripts were analyzed using an iteratively refined coding schema and content analysis. . Participants generally expressed enthusiasm for the tool's design and functionality. Our analysis identified desired filters for users to view patients like themselves, outcome types that should be included in future iterations of the tool (e.g. patient reported outcomes), and information needs that need to be addressed for patients to effectively participate in shared decision making. Implications for the integration of our findings into the design of patient decision aids are discussed. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Promoting shared decision-making in rehabilitation: development of a framework for situations when patients with Dysphagia refuse diet modification recommended by the treating team.

Science.gov (United States)

Kaizer, Franceen; Spiridigliozzi, Anna-Maria; Hunt, Matthew R

2012-03-01

To address the risks of aspiration pneumonia, patients with dysphagia may be prescribed a modified diet. The goal of diet modification is to decrease the risk of patients aspirating food due to their diminished swallowing reflex. Some patients may not accept diet modification or may not adhere to the treatments identified by the interdisciplinary team. Such scenarios may result in important moral uncertainty and concern for clinicians. As a result of several ethics consultations related to this issue, a working group of the Clinical Ethics Committee at the Jewish Rehabilitation Hospital in Laval, Quebec, Canada, developed a framework for responding to situations when patients do not adhere to recommended diet modification. The goal of this tool is to facilitate discussion and collaboration between clinicians and patients, to clarify assumed versus real risk, and to promote shared decision-making in dysphagia care. In this article we examine the clinical context of diet modification for patients with dysphagia in rehabilitation hospitals, explore ethical aspects of this topic, present the clinical algorithm, and discuss our experience with developing and piloting this tool.

A study protocol of the effectiveness of PEGASUS: a multi-centred study comparing an intervention to promote shared decision making about breast reconstruction with treatment as usual.

Science.gov (United States)

Harcourt, Diana; Paraskeva, Nicole; White, Paul; Powell, Jane; Clarke, Alex

2017-10-02

Increasingly, women elect breast reconstruction after mastectomy. However, their expectations of surgery are often not met, and dissatisfaction with outcome and ongoing psychosocial concerns and distress are common. We developed a patient-centered intervention, PEGASUS:(Patients' Expectations and Goals: Assisting Shared Understanding of Surgery) which supports shared decision making by helping women clarify their own, individual goals about reconstruction so that they can discuss these with their surgeon. Our acceptability/feasibility work has shown it is well received by patients and health professionals alike. We now need to establish whether PEGASUS improves patients' experiences of breast reconstruction decision making and outcomes. The purpose of this study is, therefore, to examine the effectiveness of PEGASUS, an intervention designed to support shared decision making about breast reconstruction. A multi-centered sequential study will compare the impact of PEGASUS with usual care, in terms of patient reported outcomes (self-reported satisfaction with the outcome of surgery, involvement in decision making and in the consultation) and health economics. Initially we will collect data from our comparison (usual care) group (90 women) who will complete standardized measures (Breast-Q, EQ5D -5 L and ICECAP- A) at the time of decision making, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. Health professionals will then be trained to use PEGASUS, which will be delivered to the intervention group (another 90 women completing the same measures at the time of decision making, and 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery). Health professionals and a purposefully selected sample of participants will be interviewed about whether their expectations of reconstruction were met, and their experiences of PEGASUS (if appropriate). PEGASUS may have the potential to provide health professionals with an easily accessible tool aiming to support shared decision making and improve patients

Moving toward comprehensive acute heart failure risk assessment in the emergency department: the importance of self-care and shared decision making.

Science.gov (United States)

Collins, Sean P; Storrow, Alan B

2013-08-01

Nearly 700,000 emergency department (ED) visits were due to acute heart failure (AHF) in 2009. Most visits result in a hospital admission and account for the largest proportion of a projected $70 billion to be spent on heart failure care by 2030. ED-based risk prediction tools in AHF rarely impact disposition decision making. This is a major factor contributing to the 80% admission rate for ED patients with AHF, which has remained unchanged over the last several years. Self-care behaviors such as symptom monitoring, medication taking, dietary adherence, and exercise have been associated with decreased hospital readmissions, yet self-care remains largely unaddressed in ED patients with AHF and thus represents a significant lost opportunity to improve patient care and decrease ED visits and hospitalizations. Furthermore, shared decision making encourages collaborative interaction between patients, caregivers, and providers to drive a care path based on mutual agreement. The observation that “difficult decisions now will simplify difficult decisions later” has particular relevance to the ED, given this is the venue for many such issues. We hypothesize patients as complex and heterogeneous as ED patients with AHF may need both an objective evaluation of physiologic risk as well as an evaluation of barriers to ideal self-care, along with strategies to overcome these barriers. Combining physician gestalt, physiologic risk prediction instruments, an evaluation of self-care, and an information exchange between patient and provider using shared decision making may provide the critical inertia necessary to discharge patients home after a brief ED evaluation.

A conceptual framework for interprofessional shared decision making in home care: Protocol for a feasibility study

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Murray Mary-Anne

2011-01-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background Shared decision making (SDM is fundamental to informed consent and client-centered care. So far, SDM frameworks have been limited to the client-physician dyad, even though care is increasingly delivered by interprofessional (IP teams. IP collaboration is especially essential in home care, one of health care's most rapidly growing areas. This study will assess whether it is possible to practice SDM in IP home care. Methods/Design We will use a qualitative case study and a quantitative survey to capture the macro, meso and micro levels of stakeholders in home care. The case study will follow the knowledge-to-action process framework to evaluate the work of an IP home care team at a Quebec City health center. Sources of data will include one-on-one interviews with patients, family caregivers or surrogates and significant others, and administrators; a focus group of home care health professionals; organizational documents; and government policies and standards. The interview guide for the interviews and the focus group will explore current practices and clinical problems addressed in home care; factors that could influence the implementation of the proposed IP approach to SDM; the face and content validity of the approach; and interventions to facilitate the implementation and evaluation of the approach. The survey will ask 300 health professionals working in home care at the health center to complete a questionnaire based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour that measures their intentions to engage in an IP approach to SDM. We will use our analysis of the individual interviews, the focus group and the survey to elaborate a toolkit for implementing an IP approach to SDM in home care. Finally, we will conduct a pilot study in Alberta to assess the transferability of our findings. Discussion We believe that developing tools to implement IP SDM in home care is essential to strengthening Canada's healthcare system and furthering

Investigating heterogeneity in social influence by social distance in car-sharing decisions under uncertainty: A regret-minimizing hybrid choice model framework based on sequential stated adaptation experiments

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Kim, J.; Rasouli, S.; Timmermans, H.J.P.

2017-01-01

The present study is designed to investigate social influence in car-sharing decisions under uncertainty. Social influence indicates that individuals’ decisions are influenced by the choices made by members of their social networks. An individual may experience different degrees of influence

Shared decision-making in mental health care—A user perspective on decisional needs in community-based services

OpenAIRE

Katarina Grim; David Rosenberg; Petra Svedberg; Ulla-Karin Schön

2016-01-01

Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) is an emergent research topic in the field of mental health care and is considered to be a central component of a recovery-oriented system. Despite the evidence suggesting the benefits of this change in the power relationship between users and practitioners, the method has not been widely implemented in clinical practice.Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate decisional and information needs among users with mental illness as a prere...

'Walking the tightrope': The role of peer support workers in facilitating consumers' participation in decision-making.

Science.gov (United States)

Cleary, Michelle; Raeburn, Toby; Escott, Phil; West, Sancia; Lopez, Violeta

2018-05-09

In adult mental health services, the participation of consumers is essential. The aim of this study was to explore the challenges faced by peer support workers when involving mental health consumers in decision-making about their care and the strategies they employed to overcome these challenges so as to improve mental health consumers' participation in decision-making and recovery. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with six peer support workers currently employed in psychiatric hospitals and/or community mental health systems. Thematic analysis identified challenges related to role definition, power imbalance, doctor-centric medical approaches to care, and lack of resources. Strategies to overcome these challenges that were reported, included the following: facilitating meaningful involvement for service users, appropriate use of the lived experience, building relationships and communication, promoting rights and advocacy, and promoting professionalism of peer support workers (PSWs). Nursing staff need ongoing support and education to understand and value the varied roles of PSWs and thereby empower PSWs to engage in enhancing consumer decision-making. The roles of the PSWs should be viewed as complementary, and greater appreciation and understanding of roles would better support recovery-oriented care. © 2018 Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc.

A democratic and student-centred approach to facilitating teamwork learning among first-year engineering students: a learning and teaching case study

Science.gov (United States)

Missingham, Dorothy; Matthews, Robert

2014-07-01

This work examines an innovative and evolving approach to facilitating teamwork learning in a generic first-year mechanical engineering course. Principles of inclusive, student-active and democratic pedagogy were utilised to engage students on both the social and personal planes. Learner opportunities to facilitate, direct and lead the learning direction were emphasised. This emphasis encouraged a rich learning process and motivated students dismissive of the need to examine their communication skills and those who initially perceived the topic as a personal intrusion. Through a sharing of curriculum decisions, a climate of trust, ownership and shared value arose. Students chose from a range of tools across personality-type indicators, learning style indicators and hierarchies of human needs, to assist their capacity to express and discuss engineering designs and concepts. Peer teaching and collaborative exercises were incorporated to provide an authentic learning context and to further the student's sense of ownership.

The Counseling, Self-Care, Adherence Approach to Person-Centered Care and Shared Decision Making: Moral Psychology, Executive Autonomy, and Ethics in Multi-Dimensional Care Decisions.

Science.gov (United States)

Herlitz, Anders; Munthe, Christian; Törner, Marianne; Forsander, Gun

2016-08-01

This article argues that standard models of person-centred care (PCC) and shared decision making (SDM) rely on simplistic, often unrealistic assumptions of patient capacities that entail that PCC/SDM might have detrimental effects in many applications. We suggest a complementary PCC/SDM approach to ensure that patients are able to execute rational decisions taken jointly with care professionals when performing self-care. Illustrated by concrete examples from a study of adolescent diabetes care, we suggest a combination of moral and psychological considerations to support the claim that standard PCC/SDM threatens to systematically undermine its own goals. This threat is due to a tension between the ethical requirements of SDM in ideal circumstances and more long-term needs actualized by the context of self-care handled by patients with limited capacities for taking responsibility and adhere to their own rational decisions. To improve this situation, we suggest a counseling, self-care, adherence approach to PCC/SDM, where more attention is given to how treatment goals are internalized by patients, how patients perceive choice situations, and what emotional feedback patients are given. This focus may involve less of a concentration on autonomous and rational clinical decision making otherwise stressed in standard PCC/SDM advocacy.

Investigating heterogeneity in social influence by social distance in car-sharing decisions under uncertainty : a regret-minimizing hybrid choice model framework based on sequential stated adaptation experiments

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Kim, J.; Rasouli, S.; Timmermans, H.J.P.

2016-01-01

The present study is designed to investigate social influence in the car-sharing decision under uncertainty. Social influence indicates the phenomenon that individuals’ decisions are influenced by the choices made by members of their social networks. An individual may receive different amounts of

Using CollaboRATE, a brief patient-reported measure of shared decision making: Results from three clinical settings in the United States.

Science.gov (United States)

Forcino, Rachel C; Barr, Paul J; O'Malley, A James; Arend, Roger; Castaldo, Molly G; Ozanne, Elissa M; Percac-Lima, Sanja; Stults, Cheryl D; Tai-Seale, Ming; Thompson, Rachel; Elwyn, Glyn

2018-02-01

CollaboRATE is a brief patient survey focused on shared decision making. This paper aims to (i) provide insight on facilitators and challenges to implementing a real-time patient survey and (ii) evaluate CollaboRATE scores and response rates across multiple clinical settings with varied patient populations. All adult patients at three United States primary care practices were eligible to complete CollaboRATE post-visit. To inform key learnings, we aggregated all mentions of unanticipated decisions, problems and administration errors from field notes and email communications. Mixed-effects logistic regression evaluated the impact of site, clinician, patient age and patient gender on the CollaboRATE score. While CollaboRATE score increased only slightly with increasing patient age (OR 1.018, 95% CI 1.014-1.021), female patient gender was associated with significantly higher CollaboRATE scores (OR 1.224, 95% CI 1.073-1.397). Clinician also predicts CollaboRATE score (random effect variance 0.146). Site-specific factors such as clinical workflow and checkout procedures play a key role in successful in-clinic implementation and are significantly related to CollaboRATE scores, with Site 3 scoring significantly higher than Site 1 (OR 1.759, 95% CI 1.216 to 2.545) or Site 2 (z=-2.71, 95% CI -1.114 to -0.178). This study demonstrates that CollaboRATE can be used in diverse primary care settings. A clinic's workflow plays a crucial role in implementation. Patient experience measurement risks becoming a burden to both patients and administrators. Episodic use of short measurement tools could reduce this burden. © 2017 The Authors Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

To share or not to share: The role of epistemic belief in online health rumors.

Science.gov (United States)

Chua, Alton Y K; Banerjee, Snehasish

2017-12-01

This paper investigates the role of epistemic belief in affecting Internet users' decision to share online health rumors. To delve deeper, it examines how the characteristics of rumors-true or false, textual or pictorial, dread or wish-shape the decision-making among epistemologically naïve and robust users separately. An experiment was conducted. Responses were obtained from 110 participants, who were exposed to eight rumors. This yielded 880 cases (110 participants×8 rumors) for statistical analyses. Epistemologically naive participants were more likely to share online health rumors than epistemologically robust individuals. Epistemologically robust participants were more likely to share textual rumors than pictorial ones. However, there were no differences between true and false rumors or between dread and wish rumors for either epistemologically naive or robust participants. This paper contributes to the understanding of users' health information sharing behavior. It encourages users to cultivate robust epistemic belief in order to improve their online health information processing skills. Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Key stakeholders' perceptions of the acceptability and usefulness of a tablet-based tool to improve communication and shared decision making in ICUs.

Science.gov (United States)

Ernecoff, Natalie C; Witteman, Holly O; Chon, Kristen; Chen, Yanquan Iris; Buddadhumaruk, Praewpannarai; Chiarchiaro, Jared; Shotsberger, Kaitlin J; Shields, Anne-Marie; Myers, Brad A; Hough, Catherine L; Carson, Shannon S; Lo, Bernard; Matthay, Michael A; Anderson, Wendy G; Peterson, Michael W; Steingrub, Jay S; Arnold, Robert M; White, Douglas B

2016-06-01

Although barriers to shared decision making in intensive care units are well documented, there are currently no easily scaled interventions to overcome these problems. We sought to assess stakeholders' perceptions of the acceptability, usefulness, and design suggestions for a tablet-based tool to support communication and shared decision making in ICUs. We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 58 key stakeholders (30 surrogates and 28 ICU care providers). Interviews explored stakeholders' perceptions about the acceptability of a tablet-based tool to support communication and shared decision making, including the usefulness of modules focused on orienting families to the ICU, educating them about the surrogate's role, completing a question prompt list, eliciting patient values, educating about treatment options, eliciting perceptions about prognosis, and providing psychosocial support resources. The interviewer also elicited stakeholders' design suggestions for such a tool. We used constant comparative methods to identify key themes that arose during the interviews. Overall, 95% (55/58) of participants perceived the proposed tool to be acceptable, with 98% (57/58) of interviewees finding six or more of the seven content domains acceptable. Stakeholders identified several potential benefits of the tool including that it would help families prepare for the surrogate role and for family meetings as well as give surrogates time and a framework to think about the patient's values and treatment options. Key design suggestions included: conceptualize the tool as a supplement to rather than a substitute for surrogate-clinician communication; make the tool flexible with respect to how, where, and when surrogates can access the tool; incorporate interactive exercises; use video and narration to minimize the cognitive load of the intervention; and build an extremely simple user interface to maximize usefulness for individuals with low computer literacy. There is

Psychometrics of shared decision making and communication as patient centered measures for two language groups.

Science.gov (United States)

Alvarez, Kiara; Wang, Ye; Alegria, Margarita; Ault-Brutus, Andrea; Ramanayake, Natasha; Yeh, Yi-Hui; Jeffries, Julia R; Shrout, Patrick E

2016-09-01

Shared decision making (SDM) and effective patient-provider communication are key and interrelated elements of patient-centered care that impact health and behavioral health outcomes. Measurement of SDM and communication from the patient's perspective is necessary in order to ensure that health care systems and individual providers are responsive to patient views. However, there is a void of research addressing the psychometric properties of these measures with diverse patients, including non-English speakers, and in the context of behavioral health encounters. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of 2 patient-centered outcome measures, the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire-9 (SDM-Q) and the Kim Alliance Scale-Communication subscale (KAS-CM), in a sample of 239 English and Spanish-speaking behavioral health patients. One dominant factor was found for each scale and this structure was used to examine whether there was measurement invariance across the 2 language groups. One SDM-Q item was inconsistent with the configural invariance comparison and was removed. The remaining SDM-Q items exhibited strong invariance, meaning that item loadings and item means were similar across the 2 groups. The KAS-CM items had limited variability, with most respondents indicating high communication levels, and the invariance analysis was done on binary versions of the items. These had metric invariance (loadings the same over groups) but several items violated the strong invariance test. In both groups, the SDM-Q had high internal consistency, whereas the KAS-CM was only adequate. These findings help interpret results for individual patients, taking into account cultural and linguistic differences in how patients perceive SDM and patient-provider communication. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved).

Training family physicians and residents in family medicine in shared decision making to improve clinical decisions regarding the use of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections: protocol for a clustered randomized controlled trial

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Frémont Pierre

2011-01-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background To explore ways to reduce the overuse of antibiotics for acute respiratory infections (ARIs, we conducted a pilot clustered randomized controlled trial (RCT to evaluate DECISION+, a training program in shared decision making (SDM for family physicians (FPs. This pilot project demonstrated the feasibility of conducting a large clustered RCT and showed that DECISION+ reduced the proportion of patients who decided to use antibiotics immediately after consulting their physician. Consequently, the objective of this study is to evaluate, in patients consulting for ARIs, if exposure of physicians to a modified version of DECISION+, DECISION+2, would reduce the proportion of patients who decide to use antibiotics immediately after consulting their physician. Methods/design The study is a multi-center, two-arm, parallel clustered RCT. The 12 family practice teaching units (FPTUs in the network of the Department of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine of Université Laval will be randomized to a DECISION+2 intervention group (experimental group or to a no-intervention control group. These FPTUs will recruit patients consulting family physicians and residents in family medicine enrolled in the study. There will be two data collection periods: pre-intervention (baseline including 175 patients with ARIs in each study arm, and post-intervention including 175 patients with ARIs in each study arm (total n = 700. The primary outcome will be the proportion of patients reporting a decision to use antibiotics immediately after consulting their physician. Secondary outcome measures include: 1 physicians and patients' decisional conflict; 2 the agreement between the parties' decisional conflict scores; and 3 perception of patients and physicians that SDM occurred. Also in patients, at 2 weeks follow-up, adherence to the decision, consultation for the same reason, decisional regret, and quality of life will be assessed. Finally, in both patients

Assessment of cost sharing in the Pima County Marketplace.

Science.gov (United States)

Jennings, Nicholas B; Eng, Howard J

2017-01-01

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act established health insurance marketplaces to allow consumers to make educated decisions about their health care coverage. During the first open enrollment period in 2013, the federally facilitated marketplace in Pima County, Arizona listed 119 plans, making it one of the most competitive markets in the country. This study compares these plans based on differences in consumer cost sharing, including deductibles, co-pays and premiums. Consumer costs were reviewed using specific cases including a normal delivery pregnancy, the management of Type II Diabetes, and the utilization of specialty drugs to treat Hepatitis C. Total cost of care was calculated as the cost of managing the condition or event plus the cost of monthly premiums, evaluated as a single individual age 27. Evaluating a plan on premium alone is not sufficient as cost sharing can dramatically raise the cost of care. A rating system and better cost transparency tools could provider easier access to pertinent information for consumers. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Sharing Video Datasets in Design Research

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Christensen, Bo; Abildgaard, Sille Julie Jøhnk

2017-01-01

This paper examines how design researchers, design practitioners and design education can benefit from sharing a dataset. We present the Design Thinking Research Symposium 11 (DTRS11) as an exemplary project that implied sharing video data of design processes and design activity in natural settings...... with a large group of fellow academics from the international community of Design Thinking Research, for the purpose of facilitating research collaboration and communication within the field of Design and Design Thinking. This approach emphasizes the social and collaborative aspects of design research, where...... a multitude of appropriate perspectives and methods may be utilized in analyzing and discussing the singular dataset. The shared data is, from this perspective, understood as a design object in itself, which facilitates new ways of working, collaborating, studying, learning and educating within the expanding...

Development of a shared decision-making tool to assist patients and clinicians with decisions on oral anticoagulant treatment for atrial fibrillation.

Science.gov (United States)

Kaiser, Karen; Cheng, Wendy Y; Jensen, Sally; Clayman, Marla L; Thappa, Andrew; Schwiep, Frances; Chawla, Anita; Goldberger, Jeffrey J; Col, Nananda; Schein, Jeff

2015-12-01

Decision aids (DAs) are increasingly used to operationalize shared decision-making (SDM) but their development is not often described. Decisions about oral anticoagulants (OACs) for atrial fibrillation (AF) involve a trade-off between lowering stroke risk and increasing OAC-associated bleeding risk, and consideration of how treatment affects lifestyle. The benefits and risks of OACs hinge upon a patient's risk factors for stroke and bleeding and how they value these outcomes. We present the development of a DA about AF that estimates patients' risks for stroke and bleeding and assesses their preferences for outcomes. Based on a literature review and expert discussions, we identified stroke and major bleeding risk prediction models and embedded them into risk assessment modules. We identified the most important factors in choosing OAC treatment (warfarin used as the default reference OAC) through focus group discussions with AF patients who had used warfarin and clinician interviews. We then designed preference assessment and introductory modules accordingly. We integrated these modules into a prototype AF SDM tool and evaluated its usability through interviews. Our tool included four modules: (1) introduction to AF and OAC treatment risks and benefits; (2) stroke risk assessment; (3) bleeding risk assessment; and (4) preference assessment. Interactive risk calculators estimated patient-specific stroke and bleeding risks; graphics were developed to communicate these risks. After cognitive interviews, the content was improved. The final AF tool calculates patient-specific risks and benefits of OAC treatment and couples these estimates with patient preferences to improve clinical decision-making. The AF SDM tool may help patients choose whether OAC treatment is best for them and represents a patient-centered, integrative approach to educate patients on the benefits and risks of OAC treatment. Future research is needed to evaluate this tool in a real-world setting. The

Implementing shared decision making in federally qualified health centers, a quasi-experimental design study: the Office-Guidelines Applied to Practice (Office-GAP) program

OpenAIRE

Olomu, Adesuwa; Hart-Davidson, William; Luo, Zhehui; Kelly-Blake, Karen; Holmes-Rovner, Margaret

2016-01-01

Background Use of Shared Decision-Making (SDM) and Decision Aids (DAs) has been encouraged but is not regularly implemented in primary care. The Office-Guidelines Applied to Practice (Office-GAP) intervention is an application of a previous model revised to address guidelines based care for low-income populations with diabetes and coronary heart disease (CHD). Objective: To evaluate Office-GAP Program feasibility and preliminary efficacy on medication use, patient satisfaction with physician ...

Development and initial evaluation of a treatment decision dashboard.

Science.gov (United States)

Dolan, James G; Veazie, Peter J; Russ, Ann J

2013-04-21

For many healthcare decisions, multiple alternatives are available with different combinations of advantages and disadvantages across several important dimensions. The complexity of current healthcare decisions thus presents a significant barrier to informed decision making, a key element of patient-centered care.Interactive decision dashboards were developed to facilitate decision making in Management, a field marked by similarly complicated choices. These dashboards utilize data visualization techniques to reduce the cognitive effort needed to evaluate decision alternatives and a non-linear flow of information that enables users to review information in a self-directed fashion. Theoretically, both of these features should facilitate informed decision making by increasing user engagement with and understanding of the decision at hand. We sought to determine if the interactive decision dashboard format can be successfully adapted to create a clinically realistic prototype patient decision aid suitable for further evaluation and refinement. We created a computerized, interactive clinical decision dashboard and performed a pilot test of its clinical feasibility and acceptability using a multi-method analysis. The dashboard summarized information about the effectiveness, risks of side effects and drug-drug interactions, out-of-pocket costs, and ease of use of nine analgesic treatment options for knee osteoarthritis. Outcome evaluations included observations of how study participants utilized the dashboard, questionnaires to assess usability, acceptability, and decisional conflict, and an open-ended qualitative analysis. The study sample consisted of 25 volunteers - 7 men and 18 women - with an average age of 51 years. The mean time spent interacting with the dashboard was 4.6 minutes. Mean evaluation scores on scales ranging from 1 (low) to 7 (high) were: mechanical ease of use 6.1, cognitive ease of use 6.2, emotional difficulty 2.7, decision-aiding effectiveness 5

Theories of Health Care Decision Making at the End of Life: A Meta-Ethnography.

Science.gov (United States)

Kim, Kyounghae; Heinze, Katherine; Xu, Jiayun; Kurtz, Melissa; Park, Hyunjeong; Foradori, Megan; Nolan, Marie T

2017-08-01

The aim of this meta-ethnography is to appraise the types and uses of theories relative to end-of-life decision making and to develop a conceptual framework to describe end-of-life decision making among patients with advanced cancers, heart failure, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and their caregivers or providers. We used PubMed, Embase, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases to extract English-language articles published between January 2002 and April 2015. Forty-three articles were included. The most common theories included decision-making models ( n = 14) followed by family-centered ( n = 11) and behavioral change models ( n = 7). A conceptual framework was developed using themes including context of decision making, communication and negotiation of decision making, characteristics of decision makers, goals of decision making, options and alternatives, and outcomes. Future research should enhance and apply these theories to guide research to develop patient-centered decision-making programs that facilitate informed and shared decision making at the end of life among patients with advanced illness and their caregivers.

Tailoring and evaluating an intervention to improve shared decision-making among seniors with dementia, their caregivers, and healthcare providers: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Science.gov (United States)

Giguere, Anik M C; Lawani, Moulikatou Adouni; Fortier-Brochu, Émilie; Carmichael, Pierre-Hugues; Légaré, France; Kröger, Edeltraut; Witteman, Holly O; Voyer, Philippe; Caron, Danielle; Rodríguez, Charo

2018-06-25

The increasing prevalence of Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia raises new challenges to ensure that healthcare decisions are informed by research evidence and reflect what is important for seniors and their caregivers. Therefore, we aim to evaluate a tailored intervention to help healthcare providers empower seniors and their caregivers in making health-related decisions. In two phases, we will: (1) design and tailor the intervention; and (2) implement and evaluate it. We will use theory and user-centered design to tailor an intervention comprising a distance professional training program on shared decision-making and five shared decision-making tools dealing with difficult decisions often faced by seniors with dementia and their caregivers. Each tool will be designed in two versions, one for clinicians and one for patients. We will recruit 49 clinicians and 27 senior/caregiver to participate in three cycles of design-evaluation-feedback of each intervention components. Besides think-aloud and interview approaches, users will also complete questionnaires based on the Theory of Planned Behavior to identify the factors most likely to influence their adoption of shared decision-making after exposure to the intervention. We will then modify the intervention by adding/enhancing behavior-change techniques targeting these factors. We will evaluate the effectiveness of this tailored intervention before/after implementation, in a two-armed, clustered randomized trial. We will enroll a convenience sample of six primary care clinics (unit of randomization) in the province of Quebec and recruit the clinicians who practice there (mostly family physicians, nurses, and social workers). These clinics will then be randomized to immediate exposure to the intervention or delayed exposure. Overall, we will recruit 180 seniors with dementia, their caregivers, and their healthcare providers. We will evaluate the impact of the intervention on patient involvement in the

An Examination of the Effects of Electronic Word of Mouth on Consumers’ Purchase Decision: Through the Lens of Experience Good and Search Good

OpenAIRE

Zhao, Zichen

2013-01-01

The prevailing of the Internet facilitates consumers to share information, opinions and experiences of products and services online. This new form of word of mouth communication is called electronic word of mouth (WOM). Nowadays, electronic word of mouth plays an important role in the consumers’ information search during the decision making process. A large number of managerial and academic attentions have been drawn to the effects of electronic WOM on consumer’s purchase decision. Factors wh...

Building shared situational awareness in surgery through distributed dialog

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Gillespie BM

2013-03-01

Full Text Available Brigid M Gillespie,1 Karleen Gwinner,2 Nicole Fairweather,3 Wendy Chaboyer41NHMRC Research Centre for Clinical Excellence in Nursing Interventions for Hospitalised Patients (NCREN and Research Centre for Clinical and Community Practice Innovation (RCCCPI, Griffith Health Institute, Griffith University, Queensland, 2Griffith Centre for Cultural Research, Griffith University, Queensland, 3Department of Anaesthesiology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Queensland, Australia, 4Excellence in Nursing Interventions for Hospitalized Patients (NCREN Research Centre for Clinical and Community Practice INHMRC Centre of Research Innovation (RCCCPI, Griffith Health Institute, Griffith University Queensland, AustraliaBackground: Failure to convey time-critical information to team members during surgery diminishes members' perception of the dynamic information relevant to their task, and compromises shared situational awareness. This research reports the dialog around clinical decisions made by team members in the time-pressured and high-risk context of surgery, and the impact of these communications on shared situational awareness.Methods: Fieldwork methods were used to capture the dynamic integration of individual and situational elements in surgery that provided the backdrop for clinical decisions. Nineteen semistructured interviews were performed with 24 participants from anesthesia, surgery, and nursing in the operating rooms of a large metropolitan hospital in Queensland, Australia. Thematic analysis was used.Results: The domain "coordinating decisions in surgery" was generated from textual data. Within this domain, three themes illustrated the dialog of clinical decisions, ie, synchronizing and strategizing actions, sharing local knowledge, and planning contingency decisions based on priority.Conclusion: Strategies used to convey decisions that enhanced shared situational awareness included the use of "self-talk", closed-loop communications, and

Patient centered decision making: use of conjoint analysis to determine risk-benefit trade-offs for preference sensitive treatment choices.

Science.gov (United States)

Wilson, Leslie; Loucks, Aimee; Bui, Christine; Gipson, Greg; Zhong, Lixian; Schwartzburg, Amy; Crabtree, Elizabeth; Goodin, Douglas; Waubant, Emmanuelle; McCulloch, Charles

2014-09-15

Understanding patient preferences facilitates shared decision-making and focuses on patient-centered outcomes. Little is known about relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patient preferences for disease modifying therapies (DMTs). We use choice based conjoint (CBC) analysis to calculate patient preferences for risk/benefit trade-offs for hypothetical DMTs. Patients with RRMS were surveyed between 2012 and 2013. Our CBC survey mimicked the decision-making process and trade-offs of patients choosing DMTs, based on all possible DMT attributes. Mixed-effects logistic regression analyzed preferences. We estimated maximum acceptable risk trade-offs for various DMT benefits. Severe side-effect risks had the biggest impact on patient preference with a 1% risk, decreasing patient preference five-fold compared to no risk. (OR=0.22, pbenefit (OR=3.68, pbenefit trade-offs for attributes of all available DMTs. Evaluation of patient preferences is a key step in shared decision making and may significantly impact early drug initiation and compliance. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

An exploration of tutors' experiences of facilitating problem-based learning. Part 2--implications for the facilitation of problem based learning.

Science.gov (United States)

Haith-Cooper, Melanie

2003-01-01

This paper is the second of two parts exploring a study that was undertaken to investigate the role of the tutor in facilitating problem-based learning (PBL). The first part focussed on the methodological underpinnings of the study. This paper aims to focus on the findings of the study and their implications for the facilitation of PBL. Six essential themes emerged from the findings that described the facilitation role. The tutors believed that their facilitation role was essentially structured around the decision of when to intervene and how to intervene in the PBL process. Modelling and non-verbal communication were seen as essential strategies for the facilitator. Underpinning these decisions was the need to trust in the philosophy of PBL. However, within many of the themes, there was a divergence of opinion as to how the role should actually be undertaken. Despite this, these findings have implications for the future role of PBL facilitators in Health Professional Education.