Training health professionals in shared decision making: Update of an international environmental scan

Physicians' and residents' educational needs regarding shared decision making: A focus group study

OBJECTIVES

To explore the educational needs of physicians and residents regarding shared decision making (SDM).

METHODS

We conducted eight focus groups with 12 general practitioners (GPs), 14 hospital specialists, 12 hospital specialist residents and 13 GP residents in Belgium. We used thematic analysis to guide data analysis.

RESULTS

We identified five educational needs: (1) the need for a clear understanding of the definition of SDM and its scope; (2) how to deal with a changing professional identity; (3) acquisition of skills to perform SDM; (4) the need for reflective practice in a supportive environment; and (5) sustainable and longitudinal integration in education.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first focus group study emphasizing dealing with a changing professional identity as an educational need, besides the need for SDM-related knowledge and skills. Physicians stated that implementing spiral learning is needed at all stages of medical training, aimed at all specialties to foster interprofessional collaboration.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Our findings can support development of future educational SDM interventions, integrating both competence development and professional identity formation. We provide practical recommendations on didactic formats and strategies, hoping to finally reach better implementation of SDM in daily practice.

Shared decision-making training embedded in undergraduate and postgraduate medical education: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This review mapped the published literature on shared decision-making (SDM) training embedded in undergraduate and/or postgraduate medical education.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review following the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. We searched ten databases and Google Scholar and manual searched reference list in included articles. Two researchers independently screened articles and extracted data. A narrative synthesis was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

This review identified 27 studies describing 25 unique SDM programs. Most programs integrated SDM training in undergraduate education, encompassing an overview of SDM theories and enhancing skills through role-plays. The programs duration ranged from one to 24 h. Overall, they improved students' SDM knowledge, attitude, confidence and skills, but the impact for students on patients is unclear due to lack of long-term follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The current SDM programs appear to be effectiveness in achieving short-term SDM-related outcomes. These programs were heterogeneous in their content, duration and delivery. Future research should concentrate on exploring the long-term impact of SDM programs, particularly students' application of SDM practices and patient outcomes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Embedding SDM training in undergraduate and/or postgraduate medical education may be a practical and effective solution for current barriers to the widespread adoption of SDM.

MMpowerment: Empowering patients with multiple myeloma for shared decision-making by developing an intervention to integrate personal preferences into digital care pathways

OBJECTIVE

As part of a quality improvement initiative in the context of value-based health care we aimed to optimize the shared decision-making (SDM) process in the care pathway for Multiple Myeloma as part of a digital care pathway (DCP). For this, more insight was needed in health care professionals' (HCPs') perspectives on SDM, and how SDM elements could be addressed in a DCP for MM to facilitate HCPs' performance of SDM.

METHODS

HCPs were interviewed as per the theory of planned behaviour and the model of organizational context and SDM (phase 1). Multidisciplinary development sessions were organized to discuss concepts of the solution with HCPs (phase 2). The solution was evaluated with two patients from the quality improvement team.

RESULTS

In phase 1, ten interviews were held. HCPs' attitudes and the subjective norm towards SDM were positive, and the intention to perform SDM was high. The clinical environment (physical context, disease characteristics, assumptions about patient characteristics, and workflows) for MM posed challenges on the actual SDM behavior. Education and use of the DCP to create awareness of SDM were seen as possible facilitators for SDM. A prepared and active patient would facilitate the SDM process. In phase 2, three concept solutions were developed before arriving at the final solution. The final solution consisted of three elements to incorporate SDM steps in the DCP: 1) creating patient awareness and activation with two questions about their preferences prior to a consultation, 2) visualisation of preferences centrally in the DCP to trigger HCP to discuss them, 3) monitoring and improving SDM with patient-questionnaires after decision-making. Patients and HCPs were willing to implement it.

CONCLUSION

HCPs intention to engage in SDM was high, but their actual behaviour was challenged by the clinical environment. A 3-element DCP-based intervention was developed to increase SDM.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Input on the solution was obtained from end-users including two patients and ten healthcare professionals.

Shared decision-making with athletes: a survey study of healthcare professionals' perspectives

Objectives

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a trending topic in athlete health care; however, little is known about its use in a sports context. This study aimed to measure knowledge and self-perceived practice of SDM among healthcare professionals working with athletes. This study evaluates SDM attitudes and preferences and explores how healthcare professionals perceive the factors influencing SDM.

Methods

A web-based cross-sectional survey with open-ended and closed-ended questions.

Results

Our survey was completed by 131 healthcare professionals. The majority (63.6%) reported to prefer SDM and to be confident in their SDM skills (81.1%). Despite this inclination and confidence, only one in four clinicians reported consistent practice of SDM when feasible. Additionally, most clinicians lacked SDM knowledge. The barriers perceived by healthcare professionals included time constraints (17.6%), limited patient knowledge (17.6%), limited patient motivation (13.5%) and language barriers (16.2%). Importantly, two-thirds of the participants believed that SDM in athlete health care differs from SDM in non-athletes due to the high-pressure environment, the tension between performance and health, and the involvement of multiple stakeholders with potentially conflicting interests.

Conclusions

Although healthcare professionals preferred SDM, they did not fully understand nor routinely practice it. Most healthcare professionals perceive SDM in athlete health care to differ from SDM in the general population. Therefore, to inform the implementation of SDM in athlete health care, future research is crucial to understand better what makes practising SDM unique in this setting.

Information and communication priorities of patients and healthcare professionals in shared decision making regarding adjuvant systemic breast cancer treatment: A survey study

PURPOSE

To assess information and communication priorities of patients and healthcare professionals in Shared Decision Making about adjuvant systemic treatment of primary breast cancer and identify key decision-relevant information accordingly.

METHODS

Patients (N = 122) and professionals working with breast cancer patients (N = 118), of whom 38 were nurse practitioners and 32 nurses, were recruited using convenience sampling, and surveyed about information/communication aspects key to decision-making, using ranking assignments. We further posed a simple open question, questions about receiving population-based statistics versus personalized statistics concerning treatment outcomes, and their attitude and experience concerning Shared Decision Making. Data were analyzed using descriptive analysis and a qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

Both patients and professionals prioritized information about treatment outcomes (i.e., survival, recurrence) as key decision-relevant information for patients. Patients prioritized information about relatively severe treatment side-effects and late effects (e.g., blood clot, stroke), whilst professionals prioritized information about effects that occur relatively often (e.g., hair loss, fatigue). Patients specifically wanted to know if the benefit of treatment is worth the negative impact. Both groups prioritized personalized statistics over population-based statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

Some differences between patients and professionals were found in information and communication priorities, specifically related to the different side-effects. It seems worthwhile to precisely address these side-effects in Shared Decision Making concerning adjuvant systemic treatment. Furthermore, it seems important to deliberate together on the question if expected benefit of treatment is worth the potential negative impact for the individual patient.

Training Undergraduate Medical Students in Shared Decision Making: A Systematic Review

In the field of healthcare delivery, shared decision making (SDM) refers to a collaborative process, wherein both patients and the healthcare professionals mutually work to make informed and consensus decisions with reference to the kind of medical care that will be administered to patients. The purpose of the current review is to explore SDM in health care, ascertain the role of medical education, and identify the ways to train and assess undergraduate medical students in competencies pertaining to SDM. An extensive search of all materials related to the topic was carried out on the PubMed and Google Scholar search engines and a total of 29 articles were selected based on their suitability with the current review objectives and analyzed. Keywords used in the search include learning resources in the title alone only (viz. shared decision making [ti] AND patient [ti]; shared decision making [ti] AND medical education [ti]; shared decision making [ti] AND assessment [ti]; shared decision making [ti] AND self-assessment [ti]; shared decision making [ti]; shared decision making [ti]). In the domain of medical education, the promotion of SDM essentially will require a multipronged approach to enable its integration into the medical curriculum. However, we must remember that mere teaching-learning methods would not improve it unless they are supplemented with assessment methods, otherwise, we will fail to deliver sustained results. In conclusion, SDM in medical education and healthcare industry represents a transformative shift from the traditional paradigm to a patient-centered approach that empowers both patients and healthcare providers, including budding medical students. The need of the hour is to advocate and encourage structured integration of SDM in the medical curriculum and support the same with periodic assessments.

Talking, not training, increased the accuracy of physicians' diagnosis of their patients' preferences for colon cancer screening

OBJECTIVE

Identify if primary care physicians (PCPs) accurately understand patient preferences for colorectal cancer (CRC) testing, whether shared decision making (SDM) training improves understanding of patient preferences, and whether time spent discussing CRC testing improves understanding of patient preferences.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of a trial comparing SDM training plus a reminder arm to a reminder alone arm. PCPs and their patients completed surveys after visits assessing whether they discussed CRC testing, patient testing preference, and time spent discussing CRC testing. We compared patient and PCP responses, calculating concordance between patient-physician dyads. Multilevel models tested for differences in preference concordance by arm or time discussing CRC.

RESULTS

382 PCP and patient survey dyads were identified. Most dyads agreed on whether CRC testing was discussed (82%). Only 52% of dyads agreed on the patient's preference. SDM training did not impact accuracy of PCPs preference diagnoses (55%v.48%,p = 0.22). PCPs were more likely to accurately diagnose patient's preferences when discussions occurred, regardless of length.

CONCLUSION

Only half of PCPs accurately identified patient testing preferences. Training did not impact accuracy. Visits where CRC testing was discussed resulted in PCPs better understanding patient preferences.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

PCPs should take time to discuss testing and elicit patient preferences.

Oncology residents' experiences of decision-making in a clinical learning environment: a phenomenological study

Oncology residents routinely engage in ethically complex decision-making discussions with patients, while observing and interacting with their teaching consultant. If clinical competency in oncology decision-making guidance is to be taught deliberately and effectively, it is necessary to understand resident experiences in this context to develop appropriate educational and faculty development initiatives. Four junior and two senior postgraduate oncology residents participated in semi-structured interviews during October and November 2021 which explored their experiences of real-world decision-making scenarios. Van Manen's phenomenology of practice was used in an interpretivist research paradigm. Transcripts were analysed to articulate essential experiential themes, and composite vocative narratives were created. Three essential themes were identified: (1) residents often endorsed different decision-making approaches than supervising consultants, (2) residents experienced inner conflict, and (3) residents struggled to find their own approach to decision-making. Residents experienced being torn between a perceived obligation to defer to consultant directives, and a desire for increasing ownership of decision-making while not feeling empowered to discuss their opinions with the consultants. Residents described their experiences around ethical position awareness during decision-making in a clinical teaching context as challenging, with experiences suggesting moral distress combined with inadequate psychological safety to address ethical conflicts and unresolved questions of decision ownership with supervisors. These results suggest the need for enhanced dialogue and more research to reduce resident distress during oncology decision-making. Future research should be aimed at discovering novel ways in which residents and consultants could interact in a unique clinical learning context including graduated autonomy, a hierarchical gradient, ethical positions, physician values, and sharing of responsibility.

Engagement of Older Adults Receiving Home Care Services and Their Caregivers in Health Decisions in Partnership With Clinical Teams: Protocol for a Multimethod Study to Prioritize and Culturally Adapt Decision Aids for Home Care

BACKGROUND

Older adults (people aged 65 years and older) face many difficult decisions. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) can help them and their families make informed value-congruent decisions. Some PtDAs have been developed for the home care context, but little is known about scaling them for use with older adults in a different culture.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to (1) assess the scalability of existing PtDAs for older adults in the home care context; (2) prioritize those that best match the decisional needs of older adults in home care; and (3) culturally adapt the prioritized PtDAs so they can be scaled successfully to the Quebec health care system.

METHODS

This multimethod study includes 3 phases. All phases will be overseen by a steering committee of older adults, caregivers, health professionals, decision makers, community organization representatives, and researchers with the needed expertise. In phase 1, we will use the Innovation Scalability Self-administered Questionnaire, a validated scalability self-assessment tool, to assess the scalability of 33 PtDAs previously identified in a systematic review. Based on their scalability, their quality (based on the International Patient Decision Aids Standards), and the importance of the decision point, we will retain approximately a third of these. In phase 2, we will conduct a 2-round web-based Delphi to prioritize the PtDAs selected in phase 1. Using a snowball recruitment strategy, we aim to recruit 60 Delphi participants in the province of Quebec, including older adults, caregivers, health professionals, decision makers involved in home care services, and PtDA experts. In the first round, we will ask participants to rate the importance of several PtDA decision points according to various criteria such as prevalence and difficulty on a 5-point Likert scale (1=not important to 5=very important). Approximately 6 of the highest-rated PtDAs will be retained for presentation in the second round, and we will select up to 3 PtDAs judged as having the highest priority for cultural adaptation. In phase 3, using the Chenel framework and user-centered design methods, we will update and adapt the PtDAs to the Quebec health care system and integrate these PtDAs into an interprofessional shared decision-making training program for home care teams. The adapted PtDAs will respect the International Patient Decision Aids Standards criteria.

RESULTS

This study was funded in March 2022 by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Data collection for the web-based Delphi began in October 2023. Results are expected to be published in May 2024.

CONCLUSIONS

This project will provide relevant and culturally appropriate decision support tools for older adults making difficult decisions and their home care teams that will be ready for scaling across the province of Quebec.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/53150.

Shared decision making: audiology student perspectives

Introduction

Shared decision making is a concept in healthcare that actively involves patients in the management of their condition. The process of shared decision making is taught in clinical training programmes, including Audiology, where there are several options for the management of hearing loss. This study sought to explore the perception of Healthcare Science (Audiology) student views on shared decision making.

Methods

Twelve students across all years of the BSc Healthcare Science degree took part in three semi-structured focus groups. Four students were work-based learners, and eight students were enrolled on the standard pathway. Data were analysed using Thematic Analysis.

Results

Students' definition and understanding of shared decision making was influenced by three key factors that were based on using a range of resources, implementation of a decision aid, and recognising Ida Institute as a pinnacle of shared decision making. Students also identified their roles as the future of healthcare workforce and the importance of disseminating best practice.

Conclusion

Shared decision making is valued by students in their roles as healthcare trainees. This study data will enhance teaching practices for healthcare science students in audiology training. Future research involving patient views in clinical training is vital.

Finding Your Way - A shared decision making resource developed by and for Aboriginal people in Australia: Perceived acceptability, usability, and feasibility

BACKGROUND

Finding Your Way is a culturally adapted shared decision making (SDM) resource for Aboriginal (First Nations) people of Australia. It integrates the Eight Ways of Aboriginal Learning (8 Ways) and was created by Aboriginal health workers and community members in New South Wales (NSW), Australia.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the perceived acceptability, usability, and feasibility of Finding Your Way as a SDM resource for Aboriginal people making health and wellbeing decisions.

METHODS

The web-based resources were disseminated using social media, professional networks, publications, and the 'Koori grapevine'. Thirteen 'champions' also promoted the resources. An online questionnaire was available on the website for three months. Framework analysis determined early indications of its acceptability, usability, and feasibility. Web and social media analytics were also analysed. Partnership with and leadership by Aboriginal people was integrated at all phases of the project.

RESULTS

The main landing page was accessed 5219 times by 4259 users. 132 users completed the questionnaire. The non-linear and visual aspects of the resources 'speak to mob' and identified with Aboriginal culture. The inclusion of social and emotional well-being, and the holistic approach were well received by the small number of users who opted to provide feedback. They suggested that non-digital formats and guidance on the resources are required to support use in clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

The 8 Ways enabled the development of a culturally safe SDM resource for Aboriginal people, which was well received by users who took the time to provide feedback after a brief dissemination process. Additional accessible formats, practice guides and training are required to support uptake in clinical practice.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Finding Your Way could be used to help improve experiences, health literacy, decision making quality and outcomes of healthcare for Aboriginal Australians.

A blended learning for general practitioners and nurses on skills to support shared decision-making with patients about palliative cancer treatment: A one-group pre-posttest study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a newly developed blended learning programme for general practitioners (GPs) and nurses in supporting shared decision making (SDM) about palliative cancer treatment in a simulated setting.

METHODS

In a pre-posttest study, healthcare professionals (HCPs) participated in the blended learning (i.e. e-learning and (online) training session). HCPs filled out surveys (T0 (baseline), T1 (after e-learning) and T2 (after full blended learning)) and engaged in simulated consultations at T0 and T2. The primary outcome was observed SDM support (Triple-S; DSAT-10 for validation). Secondary outcomes included satisfaction, knowledge about and attitude towards SDM support. Repeated measures General Linear Models were conducted.

RESULTS

33 HCPs (17 GPs and 16 nurses) participated. SDM support significantly improved after training (Triple-S; medium effect). Observers' overall rating of SDM support (medium effect) as well as HCPs' knowledge (large effect) and beliefs about their capabilities (medium effect) improved after training. There was no difference in decision support skills (DSAT-10), HCPs' other clinical behavioural intentions and satisfaction. HCPs evaluated the training positively.

CONCLUSION

Blended learning for HCPs on supporting SDM in palliative cancer care improved their skills, knowledge and confidence in simulated consultations.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

These first findings are promising for evaluating interprofessional SDM in clinical practice.

How physicians see nurses' role in decision-making about life-prolonging treatments in patients with a short life expectancy: An interview study

OBJECTIVE

Exploring physicians' views on hospital nurses' role in decision-making about potentially life-prolonging treatments in patients with a short life expectancy.

METHODS

A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with hospital physicians. Data were collected from May to September 2019 and analyzed following principles of thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Fifteen physicians working in different hospitals and specialisms participated. Physicians stated that they are responsible for the final decision about potentially life-prolonging treatments. They considered nurses' role in decision-making to be complementary to the roles of both patients and the physicians themselves, especially when there are doubts or complex situations. Physicians varied in how important they found nurses' involvement in the decision-making process: some physicians saw the involvement of nurses as "situation-dependent", while others viewed nurses' involvement as standard practice. Furthermore, physicians mentioned practical obstacles to involving nurses, like the limited time available to both nurses and physicians themselves.

CONCLUSION

Physicians recognize a complementary role for nurses in decision-making about potentially life-prolonging treatment, especially in cases with doubts or complex situations.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Physicians and nurses should engage with each other to make nurses' involvement less situation-dependent. This inter-professional collaboration regarding decision-making about life-prolonging treatments should be stimulated, supported and maintained.

Teaching strategies for shared decision-making within the context of evidence-based healthcare practice: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To describe the nature of teaching Shared Decision Making (SDM) within the context of Evidence Based Practice (EBP) to support development of contemporaneous EBP education programmes for healthcare learners.

METHODS

A scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidance was conducted with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) used to guide reporting.

RESULTS

The narrative overview of 23 studies provides insight into the 'what' and 'how' of teaching SDM within the context of EBP education. A minority of studies explicitly and concurrently incorporated EBP and SDM in terms of how programme content was organised. Teaching strategies most often used regardless of learner cohort or setting included didactic, face-to-face lectures, together with role-play/modelling, small group workshops and video recordings. Programme evaluation outcomes predominantly focused on participant reactions to training and participant learning.

CONCLUSION

While a disconnect between EBP and SDM remains evident in healthcare programmes, increased recognition by educators to actively facilitate this interdependent relationship is emerging.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Intentionally structuring learning activities in a manner which demonstrates the relevance and interdependence of SDM and EBP may mitigate 'learning silos' and enhance learners' abilities to make connections required in practice.

Effects of a shared decision making intervention for older adults with multiple chronic conditions: the DICO study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effects of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs).

METHODS

A pragmatic trial evaluated the effects of the SDM^MCC intervention, existing of SDM training for nine geriatricians in two hospitals and a preparatory tool for patients. A prospective pre-intervention post-intervention multi-center clinical study was conducted in which an usual care group of older patients with MCC and their informal caregivers was included before the implementation of the intervention and a new cohort of patients and informal caregivers after the implementation of the intervention. SDM was observed using the OPTION^MCC during video-recorded consultations. Patient- and caregivers reported outcomes regarding their role in SDM, involvement, perceived SDM and decisional conflict were measured. The differences between groups regarding the level of observed SDM (OPTION^MCC) were analyzed with a mixed model analysis. Dichotomous patient-reported outcomes were analyzed with a logistic mixed model.

RESULTS

From two outpatient geriatric clinics 216 patients with MCCs participated. The mean age was 77.3 years, and 56.3% of patients were female. No significant difference was found in the overall level of SDM as measured with the OPTION^MCC or in patient-reported outcomes. However, at item level the items discussing 'goals', 'options', and 'decision making' significantly improved after the intervention. The items discussing 'partnership' and 'evaluating the decision-making process' showed a significant decrease. Fifty-two percent of the patients completed the preparatory tool, but the results were only discussed in 12% of the consultations.

CONCLUSION

This study provides scope for improvement of SDM in geriatrics. Engaging older adults with MCCs and informal caregivers in the decision making process should be an essential part of SDM training for geriatricians, beyond the SDM steps of explaining options, benefits and harms. More attention should be paid to the integration of preparatory work in the consultation.

Effect of communication skills training on documentation of shared decision-making for patients with life-limiting illness: An observational study in an intensive care unit

Objectives

This article aims to examine the association between a shared decision-making (SDM) clinical communication training program and documentation of SDM for patients with life-limiting illness (LLI) admitted to intensive care.

Methods

This article used a prospective, longitudinal observational study in a tertiary intensive care unit (ICU). Outcomes included the proportion of patients with SDM documented on an institutional Goals of Care Form during hospital admission, as well as characteristics, outcomes, and factors associated with an SDM admission.

Intervention

Clinical communication skills training (iValidate) and clinical support program are the intervention for this study.

Results

A total of 325 patients with LLI were admitted to the ICU and included in the study. Overall, 184 (57%) had an SDM admission, with 79% of Goals of Care Form completed by an iValidate-trained doctor. Exposure to an iValidate-trained doctor was the strongest predictor of an ICU patient with LLI having an SDM admission (odds ratio: 22.72, 95% confidence interval: 11.91-43.54, p < 0.0001). A higher proportion of patients with an SDM admission selected high-dependency unit-level care (29% vs. 12%, p < 0.001) and ward-based care (36% vs. 5%, p < 0.0001), with no difference in the proportion of patients choosing intensive care or palliative care. The proportion of patients with no deterioration plan was higher in the non-SDM admission cohort (59% vs. 0%, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Clinical communication training that explicitly teaches identification of patient values is associated with improved documentation of SDM for critically ill patients with LLI. Understanding the relationship between improved SDM and patient, family, and clinical outcomes requires appropriately designed high-quality trials randomised at the patient or cluster level.

The greatest challenges and solutions to improve children's health and well-being worldwide in the next decade and beyond: Using complex systems and implementation science approaches

The health and well-being of children is paramount to health and well-being of society and is the foundation of health and well-being later in life. This paper presents the perspective that a complex systems approach that embeds implementation science is needed to address the rising challenges to child health and well-being in this decade (2020-2030) and beyond. Reflection on facilitators of the success of programs deemed promising to address child health and well-being in the past decade (2010-2020) is presented, to advance programs to address children's health and well-being. A priority that needs to be addressed is developing, testing and using theories of child and family health and well-being (and related initiatives) that can be used to build on existing successes to make progress. Understanding context including further elucidating the drivers of child health and well-being at multiple levels of relevant systems (e.g., health, education, community) across the life course, and considering implications for caregivers also require greater consideration. Methods to address future challenges to child health and well-being include co-designing initiatives that support child health and well-being with children and families themselves rather than using predesigned initiatives, thoughtful outcome selection, and reporting the challenges of implementing future programs to promote learning. The approaches, priorities and methods presented can be used to design or refine interventions, models or care or community-based initiatives and provide new direction to fields of child health enquiry.

Blended online learning for oncologists to improve skills in shared decision making about palliative chemotherapy: a pre-posttest evaluation

PURPOSE

To improve shared decision making (SDM) with advanced cancer patients, communication skills training for oncologists is needed. The purpose was to examine the effects of a blended online learning (i.e. e-learning and online training session) for oncologists about SDM in palliative oncological care and to compare this blended format with a more extensive, fully in-person face-to-face training format.

METHODS

A one-group pre-posttest design was adopted. Before (T0) and after (T2) training, participants conducted simulated consultations (SPAs) and surveys; after the e-learning (T1), an additional survey was filled out. The primary outcome was observed SDM (OPTION12 and 4SDM). Secondary outcomes included observed SDM per stage, SPA duration and decision made as well as oncologists' self-reported knowledge, clinical behavioural intentions, satisfaction with the communication and evaluation of the training. Additionally, outcomes of the blended learning were compared with those of the face-to-face training cohort. Analyses were conducted in SPSS by linear mixed models.

RESULTS

Oncologists (n = 17) showed significantly higher SDM scores after the blended online learning. The individual stages of SDM and the number of times the decision was postponed as well as oncologists' beliefs about capabilities, knowledge and satisfaction increased after the blended learning. Consultation duration was unchanged. The training was evaluated as satisfactory. When compared with the face-to-face training, the blended learning effects were smaller.

CONCLUSION

Blended online SDM training for oncologists was effective. However, the effects were smaller compared to face-to-face training. The availability of different training formats provides opportunities for tailoring training to the wishes and needs of learners.

Promoting Informed Decisions About Colorectal Cancer Screening in Older Adults (PRIMED Study): a Physician Cluster Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

For adults aged 76-85, guidelines recommend individualizing decision-making about whether to continue colorectal cancer (CRC) testing. These conversations can be challenging as they need to consider a patient's CRC risk, life expectancy, and preferences.

OBJECTIVE

To promote shared decision-making (SDM) for CRC testing decisions for older adults.

DESIGN

Two-arm, multi-site cluster randomized trial, assigning physicians to Intervention and Comparator arms. Patients were surveyed shortly after the visit to assess outcomes. Analyses were intention-to-treat.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

Primary care physicians affiliated with 5 academic and community hospital networks and their patients aged 76-85 who were due for CRC testing and had a visit during the study period.

INTERVENTIONS

Intervention arm physicians completed a 2-h online course in SDM communication skills and received an electronic reminder of patients eligible for CRC testing shortly before the visit. Comparator arm received reminders only.

MAIN MEASURES

The primary outcome was patient-reported SDM Process score (range 0-4 with higher scores indicating more SDM); secondary outcomes included patient-reported discussion of CRC screening, knowledge, intention, and satisfaction with the visit.

KEY RESULTS

Sixty-seven physicians (Intervention n=34 and Comparator n=33) enrolled. Patient participants (n=466) were on average 79 years old, 50% with excellent or very good self-rated overall health, and 66% had one or more prior colonoscopies. Patients in the Intervention arm had higher SDM Process scores (adjusted mean difference 0.36 (95%CI (0.08, 0.64), p=0.01) than in the Comparator arm. More patients in the Intervention arm reported discussing CRC screening during the visit (72% vs. 60%, p=0.03) and had higher intention to follow through with their preferred approach (58.0% vs. 47.1, p=0.03). Knowledge scores and visit satisfaction did not differ significantly between arms.

CONCLUSION

Physician training plus reminders were effective in increasing SDM and frequency of CRC testing discussions in an age group where SDM is essential.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03959696).

Effects and Working Mechanisms of a Multilevel Implementation Program for Applying Shared Decision-Making while Discussing Systemic Treatment in Breast Cancer

Background: Enhancing the application of shared decision-making (SDM) is critical for integrating patient preferences in breast cancer treatment choices. We investigated the effect of an adapted multilevel SDM implementation program in breast cancer care. Methods: Breast cancer patients qualifying for (neo)adjuvant systemic treatment were included in a multicenter before−after study. Consultations were audio recorded between June 2018 and July 2019 and analyzed using the five-item Observing Patient Involvement in Decision-Making (OPTION-5) instrument to score SDM application by clinicians. The Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) was used to rate patients’ perceived SDM level. Consultation duration, decision types, number of options discussed and consultations per patient were monitored. Regression analysis was used to investigate the correlated variables and program components. Results: Mean OPTION-5 scores increased from 33.9 (n = 63) before implementation to 54.3 (n = 49) after implementation (p < 0.001). The SDM-Q-9 scores did not change: 91.1 (n = 51) at baseline versus 88.9 (n = 23) after implementation (p = 0.81). Without increasing consultation time, clinicians discussed more options after implementation. The regression analysis showed that exposure to the implementation program, redistribution of tasks and discussing feedback from consultations was associated with a higher level of SDM. Conclusion: The multilevel program helped clinicians achieve clinically relevant improvement in SDM, especially when it is tailored to (individuals in) teams and includes (e-)training, discussing feedback on consultations and redistribution of tasks.

Effectiveness of Shared Decision-making Training Programs for Health Care Professionals Using Reflexivity Strategies: Secondary Analysis of a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) leads to better health care processes through collaboration between health care professionals and patients. Training is recognized as a promising intervention to foster SDM by health care professionals. However, the most effective training type is still unclear. Reflexivity is an exercise that leads health care professionals to question their own values to better consider patient values and support patients while least influencing their decisions. Training that uses reflexivity strategies could motivate them to engage in SDM and be more open to diversity.

OBJECTIVE

In this secondary analysis of a 2018 Cochrane review of interventions for improving SDM by health care professionals, we aimed to identify SDM training programs that included reflexivity strategies and were assessed as effective. In addition, we aimed to explore whether further factors can be associated with or enhance their effectiveness.

METHODS

From the Cochrane review, we first extracted training programs targeting health care professionals. Second, we developed a grid to help identify training programs that used reflexivity strategies. Third, those identified were further categorized according to the type of strategy used. At each step, we identified the proportion of programs that were classified as effective by the Cochrane review (2018) so that we could compare their effectiveness. In addition, we wanted to see whether effectiveness was similar between programs using peer-to-peer group learning and those with an interprofessional orientation. Finally, the Cochrane review selected programs that were evaluated using patient-reported or observer-reported outcome measurements. We examined which of these measurements was most often used in effective training programs.

RESULTS

Of the 31 training programs extracted, 24 (77%) were interactive, among which 10 (42%) were considered effective. Of these 31 programs, 7 (23%) were unidirectional, among which 1 (14%) was considered effective. Of the 24 interactive programs, 7 (29%) included reflexivity strategies. Of the 7 training programs with reflexivity strategies, 5 (71%) used a peer-to-peer group learning strategy, among which 3 (60%) were effective; the other 2 (29%) used a self-appraisal individual learning strategy, neither of which was effective. Of the 31 training programs extracted, 5 (16%) programs had an interprofessional orientation, among which 3 (60%) were effective; the remaining 26 (84%) of the 31 programs were without interprofessional orientation, among which 8 (31%) were effective. Finally, 12 (39%) of 31 programs used observer-based measurements, among which more than half (7/12, 58%) were effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study is the first to evaluate the effectiveness of SDM training programs that include reflexivity strategies. Its conclusions open avenues for enriching future SDM training programs with reflexivity strategies. The grid developed to identify training programs that used reflexivity strategies, when further tested and validated, can guide future assessments of reflexivity components in SDM training.

Shared decision making in recurrent ovarian cancer: Implementation of patient decision aids across three departments of oncology in Denmark

Objective

Patients with relapsed ovarian cancer are offered multiple treatment options. To match treatment with the individual patient's life situation and preferences, healthcare professionals can apply shared decision making (SDM) including patient decision aids (PtDAs).This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of two different PtDAs in consultations with patients suffering from relapsed ovarian cancer.

Methods

We analyzed the following data before and after implementation of the PtDAs: 1) observed SDM using the OPTION instrument, 2) physician treatment recommendations, and 3) patients' and physicians' evaluations of SDM in consultations using the CollaboRATE, SDM-Q-9, and SDM-Q-Doc.

Results

Significant improvement in observed SDM was found after the implementation (p = 0.002). Improvement of SDM was detected in consultations conducted by physicians reporting more than two hours of SDM-training (p < 0.001), but not when physicians reported less than two hours of SDM-training.No before/after differences in treatment recommendations and in patients' and physicians' evaluations were found.

Conclusion

Implementation of PtDAs improved the level of observed SDM. Training of physicians in SDM is necessary for improved SDM practice.

Innovation

Discussing oncological treatment options with the use of PtDAs is not standard practice in Denmark. The present study is one of the first Danish studies focusing on how to implement SDM and PtDAs in oncological consultations.

Reducing health provider stereotypes through undergraduate interprofessional education

Objective

Stereotypes among health professionals can jeopardize the delivery of collaborative healthcare and the achievement of positive patient outcomes. However, interprofessional education (IPE) can promote early clarification of roles, and understanding and mutual respect among trainees from different health disciplines. We studied the effects of IPE activities on the views and attitudes of pharmacy students toward nurse- and physician-trainees.

Methods

Pharmacy students completed a structured written reflection exercise immediately following two separate IPE activities with nursing and medical students, both oriented around diabetes care. We conducted an inductive content analysis of these texts to identify key themes according to the domains of the contact hypothesis theoretical framework: organizational authority, common goals, intergroup cooperation, equal group status and intergroup status. Pharmacy students were also asked how these IPE activities have influenced their views regarding their future pharmacy practice.

Results

Pharmacy students felt that their groups had cooperated to solve the common patient care goals in each IPE activity, and noted no distinction between the nursing and medical students. However, through either explicit or implicit negotiation of overlapping roles, many pharmacy students ultimately assumed deferential positions relative to medical students. Overall, pharmacy students' attitudes and views regarding the abilities and roles of nursing and medical students in patient care were favorably altered through the IPE activities. Notably, nurses' drug knowledge and diagnostic abilities of nurses and physicians' familiarity with the primary literature and prescribing regimens was previously under-rated but became recognized after IPE activities.

Conclusion

Pharmacy students' stereotypical views towards nursing and medical students were positively shifted when IPE activity conditions were optimized for intergroup contact.

Shared Decision Making Among Older Adults With Advanced CKD

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Older adults with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) face difficult decisions about dialysis initiation. Although shared decision making (SDM) can help align patient preferences and values with treatment options, the extent to which older patients with CKD experience SDM remains unknown.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional analysis of patient surveys examining decisional readiness, treatment options education, care partner support, and SDM.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 70 years or older from Boston, Chicago, San Diego, or Portland (Maine) with nondialysis advanced CKD.

PREDICTORS

Decisional readiness factors, treatment options education, and care partner support.

OUTCOMES

Primary: SDM measured by the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) instrument, with higher scores reflecting greater SDM. Exploratory: Factors associated with SDM.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

We used multivariable linear regression models to examine the associations between SDM and predictors, controlling for demographic and health factors.

RESULTS

Among 350 participants, mean age was 78 ± 6 years, 58% were male, 13% identified as Black, and 48% had diabetes. Mean SDM-Q-9 score was 52 ± 28. SDM item agreement ranged from 41% of participants agreeing that "my doctor and I selected a treatment option together" to 73% agreeing that "my doctor told me that there are different options for treating my medical condition." In multivariable analysis adjusted for demographic characteristics, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, and diabetes, being "well informed" and "very well informed" about kidney treatment options, having higher decisional certainty, and attendance at a kidney treatment options class were independently associated with higher SDM-Q-9 scores.

LIMITATIONS

The cross-sectional study design limits the ability to make temporal associations between SDM and the predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Many older patients with CKD do not experience SDM when making dialysis decisions, emphasizing the need for greater access to and delivery of education for individuals with advanced CKD.

Making shared decisions with older men selecting treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH): a pilot randomized trial

Background

Making high-quality decisions when selecting treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH) requires a shared decision-making approach. However, older people with lower health literacy face barriers. The pilot study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of recruiting participants and evaluate the effectiveness of a multi-level intervention on decision quality for the treatment of LUTS/BPH.

Method

In this 2-arm, randomized controlled trial, multi-ethnic Asian men aged ≥ 50 years with moderate or severe symptoms (IPSS ≥ 8 and/or QOL ≥ 3) and physicians were recruited at a Singapore public primary care clinic. Men were randomized to either physicians trained in shared decision-making and used a pictorial patient-reported symptom score (Visual Analogue Uroflowmetry Score) during the consultation or to physicians untrained in shared decision-making who did not use the score. Decision quality was measured using SDMQ-9 scores from men and their physicians after the consultation.

Results

60 men (intervention [n = 30], control [n = 30]) receiving care from 22 physicians were recruited. Men’s mean age was 70 ± 9 years: 87% were Chinese, 40% had no formal education, and 32% were of lower socioeconomic status. No difference in decision quality from the men’s nor their physicians’ perspectives was noted [for men: mean score = 70.8 (SD 20.3) vs. 59.5 (SD 22.4); adjusted p = 0.352] [for physicians: mean score = 78.1 (SD 14.1) vs. 73.2 (SD 19.8); adjusted p > 0.999].

Conclusion

It was feasible to recruit the intended participants. There was no difference in decision quality between men who used shared decision-making and usual care for the treatment of LUTS/BPH.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00519-x.

Identifying residents' educational needs to optimising postgraduate medical education about shared decision-making

OBJECTIVE

To investigate how to optimise resident engagement during workplace learning of shared decision-making (SDM) by understanding their educational needs.

METHODS

A qualitative multicentre study was conducted using video-stimulated interviews with 17 residents in General Practice. Video recordings of residents' recent clinical encounters were used to facilitate reflection on their educational needs.

RESULTS

Data analysis resulted in five themes regarding residents' educational needs for learning SDM: acquiring knowledge and skills needed to perform SDM; practising SDM; reflection and feedback; longitudinal and integrated training; and awareness and motivation for performing SDM.

CONCLUSION

Residents expressed a need for continuous attention to be paid to SDM during postgraduate medical education. That would help them engage in two parallel learning processes: acquiring the knowledge and skills necessary to perform SDM, and practising SDM in the clinical workplace. Alignment between the educational curriculum, workplace learning and resident learning activities is essential to operationalise SDM attitude, knowledge and skills into clinical performance.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The identified educational needs provide ingredients for fostering the development of SDM proficiency. The findings suggest that residents and clinical supervisors need parallel training to bridge the gap between education and clinical practice when learning SDM.

Twelve Tips for teaching shared decision making

Shared decision making (SDM) is a process in which preference-sensitive decisions are discussed with patients in a collaborative and accessible format so that patients can select an option that integrates their values and preferences into the context of evidence-based medicine. While SDM has been shown to improve some metrics of quality of care and is now included in many competencies developed by accreditation bodies, it can be challenging to successfully incorporate competencies in SDM into clinical teaching. Multiple interventions and curricula that build competency in SDM have been published, but here we aim to suggest ways to integrate teaching competencies in SDM into all forms of clinical teaching. These twelve tips provide strategies to foster trainee development of the relational and risk-benefit communication competencies that are required for successful shared decision making.

Facilitators and barriers to implementing shared decision making: A cross-sectional study of physicians in Japan

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision making (SDM) is a collaborative process in which patients and healthcare providers jointly make a medical decision. This cross-sectional study aimed to identify the facilitators and barriers to self-reported implementation of SDM in Japan, and to explore if there is effect modification by hospital types.

METHODS

A total of 129 physicians in Japan completed a questionnaire that asked about their perception of SDM based on SDM-Q-Doc and its facilitators and barriers, which corresponded to each construct of the integrated behavioral model (IBM). The association between facilitators and barriers and SDM-Q-doc score was assessed using linear regression analysis. Stratified analysis by hospital types was also performed.

RESULTS

Significant facilitators included physicians' attitude, injunctive norm, intention and habit. Significant barriers included physicians' unfavorable attitude, lack of self-efficacy, knowledge, salience and experience. Moreover, experiential attitude (concerning patient characteristics), injunctive norm (concerning patient preferences), and physician's habit were significant facilitators for physicians working in university hospitals when compared to those working in municipal hospitals.

CONCLUSION

The facilitators and barriers to implementing SDM in Japan were identified.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

More opportunities for training on SDM are needed to provide knowledge and skills, which will enhance salience and contribute their habitual practice.

Ready for SDM- evaluation of an interprofessional training module in shared decision making - A cluster randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

Ready for SDM was developed in Norway as a comprehensive modularized curriculum for health care providers (HCP). The current study evaluated the efficacy of one of the modules, a 2-hour interprofessional SDM training designed to enhance SDM competencies.

METHODS

A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted with eight District Psychiatric Centres randomized to wait-list control (CG) or intervention group (IG). Participants and trainers were not blinded to their allocation. The IG received a 2-hour didactic and interactive training, using video examples. The primary outcome was the agreement between the participants' and an expert assessment of patient involvement in a video recorded consultation. The SDM-knowledge score was a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Compared to the CG (n = 65), the IG (n = 69) judged involvement behavior in a communication example more accurately (mean difference of weighted T, adjusted for age and gender:=-0.098, p = 0.028) and demonstrated better knowledge (mean difference=-0.58; p = 0.014). A sensitivity analysis entering a random effect for cluster turned out not significant.

CONCLUSION

The interprofessional group training can improve HCPs' SDM-competencies.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Addressing interprofessional teams using SDM communication training could supplement existing SDM training approaches. More research is needed to evaluate the training module's effects as a component of large-scale implementation of SDM.

Personalized care planning and shared decision making in collaborative care programs for depression and anxiety disorders: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Collaborative care is an evidence-based approach to improving outcomes for common mental disorders in primary care. Efforts are underway to broadly implement the collaborative care model, yet the extent to which this model promotes person-centered mental health care has been little studied. The aim of this study was to describe practices related to two patient and family engagement strategies-personalized care planning and shared decision making-within collaborative care programs for depression and anxiety disorders in primary care.

METHODS

We conducted an update of a 2012 Cochrane review, which involved searches in Cochrane CCDAN and CINAHL databases, complemented by additional database, trial registry, and cluster searches. We included programs evaluated in a clinical trials targeting adults or youth diagnosed with depressive or anxiety disorders, as well as sibling reports related to these trials. Pairs of reviewers working independently selected the studies and data extraction for engagement strategies was guided by a codebook. We used narrative synthesis to report on findings.

RESULTS

In total, 150 collaborative care programs were analyzed. The synthesis showed that personalized care planning or shared decision making were practiced in fewer than half of programs. Practices related to personalized care planning, and to a lesser extent shared decision making, involved multiple members of the collaborative care team, with care managers playing a pivotal role in supporting patient and family engagement. Opportunities for quality improvement were identified, including fostering greater patient involvement in collaborative goal setting and integrating training and decision aids to promote shared decision making.

CONCLUSION

This review suggests that personalized care planning and shared decision making could be more fully integrated within collaborative care programs for depression and anxiety disorders. Their absence in some programs is a missed opportunity to spread person-centered mental health practices in primary care.

Moving shared decision-making forward in Iran

Although there have been breakthroughs in patients' rights and informed consent legislation in Iran during the last few years, there is still no policy regarding shared decision-making (SDM). Besides, SDM training and clinical implementation initiatives remain scarce within the country. In this article, we aim to provide an update on the current state of SDM in Iran and discuss future directions. Lastly, we propose an SDM model adapted to the Iranian context, through a consensus-building process with Iranian clinicians and SDM experts, to assist in its implementation in a culturally sensitive manner.

Barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making in neonatal medicine: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of parental perceptions

OBJECTIVES

Systematically review parental perceptions of shared decision-making (SDM) in neonatology, identifying barriers and facilitators to implementation.

METHODS

Electronic database (Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Scopus) and follow-up searches were conducted to identify qualitative studies. Data were extracted, thematically analysed and synthesised.

RESULTS

Searches yielded 2445 papers, of which 25 were included. Thematic analysis identified six key themes. Key barriers included emotional crises experienced in the NICU setting, lack of medical information provided to parents to inform decision-making, inadequate communication of information, poor relationships with caregivers, lack of continuity in care, and perceived power imbalances between HCPs and parents. Key facilitators included clear, honest and compassionate communication of medical information, caring and empathetic caregivers, continuity in care, and tailored approaches that reflected parent's desired level of involvement.

CONCLUSION

The highly specialised environment, and the emotional crises experienced by parents impact significantly on their perceived capacity to engage in surrogate decision-making.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Complex and multi-factorial interventions that address the training needs of HCPs, and the emotional, informational and decision support needs of parents are needed. SDM skills training, improved information delivery, and integrated emotional and decisional support could help parents to become more involved in SDM for their infant.

A shared decision-making communications workshop improves internal medicine resident skill, risk-benefit education, and counseling attitude

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the impact of a workshop on first-year medicine residents (PGY1) shared decision-making (SDM) communication skill, risk-benefit education, and attitude.

METHODS

A SDM skills-focused workshop was integrated into an academic medical center PGY1 ambulatory rotation in 2016-2017. Pre/post recordings of virtual Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) with standardized patients sharing decisions were scored using OPTION5. Risk-benefit education, including decision aid use, was measured. Pre/post surveys assessed SDM practice attitudes and perceived barriers.

RESULTS

31 of 48 (65%) PGY1 workshop attendees completed pre/post OSCEs yielding 62 videos. OPTION5 scores improved from 27/100 pre to 56/100 post (p < 0.001). Pre/post increases in integration of qualitative (15/31 vs 31/31, p < 0.001) and quantitative (3/31 vs 31/31, p < 0.001) risk measures, and decision aids (1/3 vs 31/31, p < 0.001) were observed. Pro-SDM attitude of decisional neutrality increased 16.6% pre to 71.9% post-survey (P < 0.001). Barriers to SDM remain.

CONCLUSION

This PGY1 workshop with virtual OSCEs improved SDM communication skills, the ability to find and provide risk-benefit education, and SDM-facilitating attitude.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Residency programs can improve SDM skills, risk-benefit education, and attitudes with a workshop intervention. Perceived time constraints and cognitive biases regarding risk-benefit estimates should be addressed to ensure quality SDM in practice.

Nurses' perspective on their involvement in decision-making about life-prolonging treatments: A quantitative survey study

Aims

In hospital settings, decisions about potentially life‐prolonging treatments are often made in a dialogue between a patient and their physician, with a focus on active treatment. Nurses can have a valuable contribution in this process, but it seems they are not always involved. Our aim was to explore how hospital nurses perceive their current role and preferred role in shared decision‐making about potentially life‐prolonging treatment in patients in the last phase of life.

Design

Cross‐sectional quantitative study conducted in the Netherlands in April and May 2019.

Methods

An online survey, using a questionnaire consisting of 12 statements on nurses' opinion about supporting patients in decisions about potentially life‐prolonging treatments, and 13 statements on nurses' actual involvement in these decisions.

Results

In total 179 hospital nurses from multiple institutions who care for adult patients in the last phase of life responded. Nurses agreed that they should have a role in shared decision‐making about potentially life‐prolonging treatments, indicating greatest agreement with ‘It is my task to speak up for my patient’ and ‘It is important that my role in supporting patients is clear’. However, nurses also said that in practice they were often not involved in shared decision‐making, with least involvement in ‘active participation in communication about treatment decisions’ and ‘supporting a patient with the decision’.

Conclusion

There is a discrepancy between nurses' preferred role in decision‐making about potentially life‐prolonging treatment and their actual role. More effort is needed to increase nurses' involvement.

Impact

Nurses' contribution to decision‐making is increasingly considered to be valuable by the nurses themselves, physicians and patients, though involvement is still not common. Future research should focus on strategies, such as training programs, that empower nurses to take an active role in decision‐making.

Why do medical residents prefer paternalistic decision making? An interview study

BACKGROUND

Although shared decision making is championed as the preferred model for patient care by patient organizations, researchers and medical professionals, its application in daily practice remains limited. We previously showed that residents more often prefer paternalistic decision making than their supervisors. Because both the views of residents on the decision-making process in medical consultations and the reasons for their 'paternalism preference' are unknown, this study explored residents' views on the decision-making process in medical encounters and the factors affecting it.

METHODS

We interviewed 12 residents from various specialties at a large Dutch teaching hospital in 2019-2020, exploring how they involved patients in decisions. All participating residents provided written informed consent. Data analysis occurred concurrently with data collection in an iterative process informing adaptations to the interview topic guide when deemed necessary. Constant comparative analysis was used to develop themes. We ceased data collection when information sufficiency was achieved.

RESULTS

Participants described how active engagement of patients in discussing options and decision making was influenced by contextual factors (patient characteristics, logistical factors such as available time, and supervisors' recommendations) and by limitations in their medical and shared decision-making knowledge. The residents' decision-making behavior appeared strongly affected by their conviction that they are responsible for arriving at the correct diagnosis and providing the best evidence-based treatment. They described shared decision making as the process of patients consenting with physician-recommended treatment or patients choosing their preferred option when no best evidence-based option was available.

CONCLUSIONS

Residents' decision making appears to be affected by contextual factors, their medical knowledge, their knowledge about SDM, and by their beliefs and convictions about their professional responsibilities as a doctor, ensuring that patients receive the best possible evidence-based treatment. They confuse SDM with acquiring informed consent with the physician's treatment recommendations and with letting patients decide which treatment they prefer in case no evidence based guideline recommendation is available. Teaching SDM to residents should not only include skills training, but also target residents' perceptions and convictions regarding their role in the decision-making process in consultations.

Evaluation of a national programme to improve shared decision-making skills among junior medical doctors in Denmark: a mixed methods study of satisfaction, usefulness, and dissemination of learning outcomes in clinical practice

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a cornerstone in patient-centred care and there has been an increase in programmes aiming to improve clinicians’ abilities to engage in it. However, the evidence for such programmes’ effectiveness on clinicians’ use of SDM in clinical practice is sparse. The SDM Ambassador course, developed and facilitated by the Danish Association of Junior Doctors in Denmark (Junior Doctors Denmark) is a Danish SDM training programme for junior medical doctors (JMDs). This study aims to evaluate the SDM Ambassador course, with a focus on satisfaction, usefulness, and dissemination of learning outcomes in clinical practice.

Methods

This is a mixed methods study, consisting of an online survey followed by semi-structured interviews. The participants were JMDs who had trained to be SDM ambassadors between May 2016 and September 2020 (n=185). The ambassadors were invited to participate in the survey and 112 ambassadors completed it, corresponding to a response rate of 61%. Descriptive statistics and χ²-tests were conducted. Subsequently, purposive sampling was used to identify 10 ambassadors for interviews. The interviews were transcribed, encoded, and subsequently analysed thematically. Finally, the quantitative and qualitative results were integrated.

Results

Overall, the ambassadors were satisfied with their learning outcomes and experienced a greater capacity to unfold the perspectives of their patients. A majority (79%) reported that they had used SDM in their clinical practice with patients, and 59% had disseminated SDM to their colleagues. The usefulness and dissemination of learning outcomes in the clinic were shaped by the ambassadors’ perceptions of their moderate professional experience as junior doctors, and constrained by structural and cultural conditions in the context of their clinical practice.

Conclusions

Despite overall satisfaction with their learning outcomes, several ambassadors experienced conditions constraining the translation of their learning outcomes into clinical practice. To improve the efficacy of the training programme, continuous refresher courses should be added, while enhanced support at organisational and political levels is necessary for SDM to become an integral feature of the clinical encounter.

Trial registration

Not applicable.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07639-6.

Defining successful outcomes and preferences for clinical management in differences/disorders of sex development: Protocol overview and a qualitative phenomenological study of stakeholders' perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Utilizing a qualitative phenomenological design, the Defining Successful Outcomes and Trade-offs study examined stakeholder perspectives regarding optimal healthcare delivery and outcomes for individuals with a difference/disorder of sex development (DSD).

OBJECTIVE

We describe study methods and provide an overview of themes and subthemes.

STUDY DESIGN

Interviews were conducted with individuals with a DSD (n = 24), parents of those with a DSD (n = 19), healthcare providers (n = 37), and others (n = 30). Primary questions regarding clinical management of patients with DSD were: "What is a successful outcome?" and "How do you achieve it?"

RESULTS

Themes included: understanding of DSD diagnosis and self-efficacy in management is necessary but complex; patient and family psychological well-being; support from others versus being stigmatized; affected person experiences physical health and accepts the implications of their condition; complexities in DSD decision making, roles and expectations; and knowledgeable providers and multidisciplinary teams are essential, notwithstanding persisting barriers. Participants recognized competing values potentially forcing trade-offs in decision making.

DISCUSSION

Recognition of diverse and sometimes conflicting perspectives regarding optimal pathways of care and outcomes - both within and among those with DSD and their providers -promises to enhance shared decision making.

CONCLUSION

Diverse perspectives and perceptions of trade-offs associated with DSD healthcare emphasize the need to tailor care for patients and families.

Interpersonal (mis)perceptions and (mis)predictions in patient-clinician interactions

Patient-clinician interactions require an interpersonal exchange of information, preferences, expectations, values, and priorities. Given the brief interaction patients and clinicians are allowed, many barriers to effective communication exist, resulting in patients and clinicians leaving an interaction with discordant perceptions of what has occurred and what is to come. We review literature on concordance and lack thereof, between patient and clinician perceptions, reasons why discordance may occur, how to decrease discordance as well as how dischordance impacts patient care and outcomes.

Primary Care Providers’ Perceptions of the Acceptability, Appropriateness, and Feasibility of a Mammography Decision Aid for Women Aged 75 and Older

Background. Clinicians need to find decision aids (DAs) useful for their successful implementation. Therefore, we aimed to conduct an exploratory study to learn primary care clinicians’ (PCPs) perspectives on a mammography DA for women ≥75 to inform its implementation. Methods. We sent a cross-sectional survey to 135 PCPs whose patients had participated in a randomized trial of the DA. These PCPs practiced at 1 of 11 practices in Massachusetts or North Carolina. PCPs were asked closed-ended and open-ended questions on shared decision making (SDM) around mammography with women ≥75 and on the DA’s acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Results. Eighty PCPs participated (24 [30%] from North Carolina). Most (n = 69, 86%) thought that SDM about mammography with women ≥75 was extremely/very important and that they engaged women ≥75 in SDM around mammography frequently/always (n = 49, 61%). Regarding DA acceptability, 60% felt the DA was too long. Regarding appropriateness, 70 (89%) thought it was somewhat/very helpful and that it would help patients make more informed decisions; 55 (70%) would recommend it. Few (n = 6, 8%) felt they had other resources to support this decision. Regarding feasibility, 53 (n = 67%) thought it would be most feasible for patients to receive the DA before a visit from medical assistants rather than during or after a visit or from health educators. Most (n = 62, 78%) wanted some training to use the DA. Limitations. Sixty-nine percent of PCPs in this small study practiced in academic settings. Conclusions. Although PCPs were concerned about the DA’s length, most found it helpful and informative and felt it would be feasible for medical assistants to deliver the DA before a visit. Implications. Study findings may inform implementation of this and other DAs.

Shared Decision-Making for a Dialysis Modality

The prevalence of kidney failure continues to rise globally. Dialysis is a treatment option for individuals with kidney failure; after the decision to initiate dialysis has been made, it is critical to involve individuals in the decision on which dialysis modality to choose. This review, based on evidence arising from the literature, examines the role of shared decision-making (SDM) in helping those with kidney failure to select a dialysis modality. SDM was found to lead to more people with kidney failure feeling satisfied with their choice of dialysis modality. Individuals with kidney failure must be cognizant that SDM is an active and iterative process, and their participation is essential for success in empowering them to make decisions on dialysis modality. The educational components of SDM must be easy to understand, high quality, unbiased, up to date, and targeted to the linguistic, educational, and cultural needs of the individual. All individuals with kidney failure should be encouraged to participate in SDM and should be involved in the design and implementation of SDM approaches.

Evaluation of a multilevel implementation program for timeout and shared decision making in breast cancer care: a mixed methods study among 11 hospital teams

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of a multilevel implementation program on shared decision making (SDM) for breast cancer clinicians.

METHODS

The program was based on the 'Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations-model' (MIDI). Key factors for effective implementation were included. Eleven breast cancer teams selected from two geographical areas participated; first six surgery teams and second five systemic therapy teams. A mixed method evaluation was carried out at the end of each period: Descriptive statistics were used for surveys and thematic content analysis for semi-structured interviews.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight clinicians returned the questionnaire (42%). Clinicians (96%) endorse that SDM is relevant to breast cancer care. The program supported adoption of SDM in their practice. Limited financial means, time constraints and concurrent activities were frequently reported barriers. Interviews (n = 21) showed that using a 4-step SDM model - when reinforced by practical examples, handy cards, feedback and training - helped to internalize SDM theory. Clinicians experienced positive results for their patients and themselves. Task re-assignment and flexible outpatient planning reinforce sustainable change. Patient involvement was valued.

CONCLUSION

Our program supported breast cancer clinicians to adopt SDM.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

To implement SDM, multilevel approaches are needed that reinforce intrinsic motivation by demonstrating benefits for patients and clinicians.

Effectiveness of individual feedback and coaching on shared decision-making consultations in oncology care: Study protocol for a randomized clinical trial (Preprint)

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) is particularly important in oncology as many treatments involve serious side effects, and treatment decisions involve a trade-off between benefits and risks. However, the implementation of SDM in oncology care is challenging, and clinicians state that it is difficult to apply SDM in their actual workplace. Training clinicians is known to be an effective means of improving SDM but is considered time consuming.

Objective

This study aims to address the effectiveness of an individual SDM training program using the concept of deliberate practice.

Methods

This multicenter, single-blinded randomized clinical trial will be performed at 12 Dutch hospitals. Clinicians involved in decisions with oncology patients will be invited to participate in the study and allocated to the control or intervention group. All clinicians will record 3 decision-making processes with 3 different oncology patients. Clinicians in the intervention group will receive the following SDM intervention: completing e-learning, reflecting on feedback reports, performing a self-assessment and defining 1 to 3 personal learning questions, and participating in face-to-face coaching. Clinicians in the control group will not receive the SDM intervention until the end of the study. The primary outcome will be the extent to which clinicians involve their patients in the decision-making process, as scored using the Observing Patient Involvement–5 instrument. As secondary outcomes, patients will rate their perceived involvement in decision-making, and the duration of the consultations will be registered. All participating clinicians and their patients will receive information about the study and complete an informed consent form beforehand.

Results

This trial was retrospectively registered on August 03, 2021. Approval for the study was obtained from the ethical review board (medical research ethics committee Delft and Leiden, the Netherlands [N20.170]). Recruitment and data collection procedures are ongoing and are expected to be completed by July 2022; we plan to complete data analyses by December 2022. As of February 2022, a total of 12 hospitals have been recruited to participate in the study, and 30 clinicians have started the SDM training program.

Conclusions

This theory-based and blended approach will increase our knowledge of effective and feasible training methods for clinicians in the field of SDM. The intervention will be tailored to the context of individual clinicians and will target the knowledge, attitude, and skills of clinicians. The patients will also be involved in the design and implementation of the study.

Trial Registration

Netherlands Trial Registry NL9647; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/9647

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/35543

The impact of patient narratives on medical students' perceptions of shared decision making: A randomized controlled trial

Successful shared decision making (SDM) in clinical practice requires that future clinicians learn to appreciate the value of patient participation as early as they can in their medical training. Narratives, such as patient testimonials, have been successfully used to support patients' decision-making process. Previous research suggests that narratives may also be used for increasing clinicians' empathy and responsiveness in medical consultations. However, so far, no studies have investigated the benefits of narratives for conveying the relevance of SDM to medical students. In this randomized controlled experiment, N = 167 medical students were put into a scenario where they prepared for medical consultation with a patient having Parkinson disease. After receiving general information, participants read either a narrative testimonial of a Parkinson patient or a fact-based information text. We measured their perceptions of SDM, their control preferences (i.e., their priorities as to who should make the decision), and the time they intended to spend for the consultation. Participants in the narrative patient testimonial condition referred more strongly to the patient as the one who should make decisions than participants who read the information text. Participants who read the patient narrative also considered SDM in situations with several equivalent treatment options to be more important than participants in the information text condition. There were no group differences regarding their control preferences. Participants who read the patient testimonial indicated that they would schedule more time for the consultation. These findings show that narratives can potentially be useful for imparting the relevance of SDM and patient-centered values to medical students. We discuss possible causes of this effect and implications for training and future research. Trial registration: The study was pre-registered on the pre-registration platform AsPredicted (aspredicted.org) before data collection began (registration number: #29,342). Date of registration: 17 October 2019.

Shared Decision Making in Cardiac Electrophysiology Procedures and Arrhythmia Management

Shared decision making (SDM) has been advocated to improve patient care, patient decision acceptance, patient-provider communication, patient motivation, adherence, and patient reported outcomes. Documentation of SDM is endorsed in several society guidelines and is a condition of reimbursement for selected cardiovascular and cardiac arrhythmia procedures. However, many clinicians argue that SDM already occurs with clinical encounter discussions or the process of obtaining informed consent and note the additional imposed workload of using and documenting decision aids without validated tools or evidence that they improve clinical outcomes. In reality, SDM is a process and can be done without decision tools, although the process may be variable. Also, SDM advocates counter that the low-risk process of SDM need not be held to the high bar of demonstrating clinical benefit and that increasing the quality of decision making should be sufficient. Our review leverages a multidisciplinary group of experts in cardiology, cardiac electrophysiology, epidemiology, and SDM, as well as a patient advocate. Our goal is to examine and assess SDM methodology, tools, and available evidence on outcomes in patients with heart rhythm disorders to help determine the value of SDM, assess its possible impact on electrophysiological procedures and cardiac arrhythmia management, better inform regulatory requirements, and identify gaps in knowledge and future needs.

Adapting the patient and physician versions of the 9-item shared decision making questionnaire for other healthcare providers in Japan

BACKGROUND

In Japan, the number of older people with various health problems and difficulties in living is increasing. In order to practice patient-centered care for them, not only medical professionals but also multidisciplinary teams including care professionals and patients need to practice shared decision making (SDM) in the context of long-term care. For this reason, a measure of SDM in consultations with healthcare professionals (HCPs) other than physicians is needed. Therefore, this study aimed at adapting the patient and physician versions of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9, SDM-Q-Doc) for consultations with HCPs other than physicians in Japan.

METHODS

A pair of SDM measures that can be used by HCPs other than physicians, "Care SDM-Questionnaire for care receivers (SDM-C-patient)" and "Care SDM-Questionnaire for care providers (SDM-C-provider)" were prepared based on the Japanese versions of the SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc. The internal consistency and conceptual structure of these measures were tested by secondary analysis of data from 496 participants from a workshop on SDM for different HCPs. Measurement invariance were tested by multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for the patient (SDM-C-patient and SDM-Q-9) and provider (SDM-C-provider vs. SDM-Q-Doc) versions.

RESULTS

Both the Japanese SDM-C-patient and SDM-C-provider demonstrated high internal consistencies (Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.90 and McDonald's ω coefficient was 0.90 for both measures). CFA showed one-factor structures for both measures and original measures for physicians. Moreover, multigroup CFA showed configural and metric invariance between the novel care measures and original physician's measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Thus, the novel SDM measures for care providers in Japan as well as the original physician's measures could be used in training setting. As these measures were tested only in a training setting, their reliability and validity as new measures for care should be tested in a clinical setting in future.

Seeing Complexity: Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) As a Lens for Shared Decision Making

Shared decision making, a collaborative approach between patient and provider that considers the patient's values and preferences in addition to the scientific evidence, is a complex clinical activity that has not realized its full potential. Gaps in education and training have been cited as barriers to shared decision making, and evidence is inconsistent on effective educational interventions. Because individual agents with their own social and behavioral contexts co-construct a shared decision, the educational approach may need to consider the role of patient agency and sociocultural influences. To address the inherent complexity in shared decision making, the authors identified cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) as a framework for analysis. Although certainly not the only relevant theory, CHAT offers an appropriate lens through which the multivoiced nature of shared decision making can be more clearly appreciated. In this article, the authors demonstrate the application of CHAT as a lens for researchers and educators to examine the complexity of shared decision making. The fictitious case presented in this article describes the use of CHAT with a patient who experiences 2 clinical encounters; during the second, shared decision making takes place. Elements of the case are threaded through the article, demonstrating a sample analysis of the interacting activity systems of the patient and physician and highlighting inherent tensions and contradictions. The authors propose CHAT as a tool for future research around the role of agency in shared decision making and other complex topics and as a framework for design of novel instructional strategies. Although not applicable to all topics and settings, CHAT has significant potential within health professions education.

Implementing Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening across a Veterans Health Administration Hospital Network

Shared-decision making (SDM) for lung cancer screening (LCS) is recommended by multiple organizations, reflecting a larger movement towards patient-centered care. Yet SDM for LCS does not routinely occur due to barriers at multiple levels. Moreover, how best to implement SDM into routine clinical practice remains unknown. There is a need for a novel approach to overcome multi-level barriers and ensure high-quality SDM for LCS is integrated into routine practice. We present the protocol for our US Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) funded study. Our protocol is designed to implement and evaluate a multi-level, tailored approach to SDM for LCS in routine clinical practice within the VA New England Health Care Network, comprising eight medical centers. In this prospective, pragmatic hybrid implementation-effectiveness study, we will first conduct a formative evaluation of barriers to SDM for LCS at each level of the socioecological model, which will inform our tailored implementation plan. We will then sequentially introduce components of our tailored, multi-level approach to implementing SDM for LCS across VA New England. Finally, using mixed methods, we will evaluate the implementation and its impact on Effectiveness (primary outcome, defined as patient-centeredness of SDM), as well as implementation outcomes informed by the RE-AIM implementation science framework (i.e., Reach to patients, Adoption by providers, Implementation fidelity). Tailored implementation will address identified challenges to achieving policy recommendations for SDM for LCS in VA New England, inform nationwide implementation of SDM for LCS, and address stakeholder interests in promoting more patient-centered interactions across the VA.

SDM Training Modules for Health and Social Care Professionals in Israel

While the strategy of Shared Decision Making (SDM) originated in the medical field and was later adopted into the mental health arena, little attention has been paid to practice in the broader fields of the allied health and social care professions. These professions are grounded in the recognition of a need for practice that reflects the partnership and collaboration of the professional and the service user working together to further the health and well-being of the user. A pilot training module was developed to introduce and support students in their journey from exposure to the co-production ideology and the SDM strategy into clinical practice in the allied health and social care professions. The aim of the present article is to describe the students' experiences while learning about SDM and their use of this knowledge in their field practice in Israel. The students' experiences highlighted the complexity of integrating SDM into practice both at the individual student level as well as the macro environment. Moreover, it pointed to the need to further develop this co-production paradigm and the SDM strategy into the education of the allied health and social care professions.

The effect of a scalable online training module for shared decision making based on flawed video examples - a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Shared Decision Making (SDM) is considered the gold standard of medical decision making as it provides a method to systematically integrate the patient's preferences, evidence-based medicine and the experience of health care professionals. Therefore, evidence-based training methods for a broad implementation into healthcare are needed. A new online training was designed, based on the concept of flawed/flawless video examples and additional educational concepts.

METHODS

In a single-blind randomized-controlled trial, medical students were randomly assigned to intervention group receiving the online training (n = 82) or waiting control group (n = 105). SDM-related knowledge and the ability to judge distinct levels of SDM were compared between both groups. Additionally, feedback regarding the intervention was collected.

RESULTS

SDM-related knowledge and judging ability increased significantly in the intervention group compared to controls (SDM knowledge: mean difference: 12 %; 95 % CI: 7.3-18.5; p < 0.001; SDM judging ability (inter-rater concordance displayed by weighted t): mean difference: 0.07; 95 %CI: 0.03-0.11; p = 0.001). Feedback was positive.

CONCLUSION

The online training with its distinctive methodology prove effective. As it shares the theoretical and didactical background with an already existing face-to-face training, both approaches may also be used complementarily.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

SDM can be trained effectively and efficiently with this easily scalable online training.