Shared decision-making in Canada: Update on integration of evidence in health decisions and patient-centred care government mandates

The impact of resistance on telemedicine use for people with disabilities

People with disabilities face many challenges in accessing healthcare. They may be provided opportunities to utilize new technologies just like non-disabled patients, but their unique challenges might cause them to resist new technology. The purpose of the study is to explore reasons why disabled patients might resist telemedicine. Using thematic analysis, we analyzed open-ended questions from a larger telemedicine survey for people with disabilities in the United States. The analysis identified the following themes: concerns about the patient-provider relationship and trust, worry about security and privacy, telemedicine has its place - but not for every type of visit, and concerns with overutilization and cost. The paper demonstrated that while telemedicine provides convenience to patients in terms of removing barriers such as transportation and cost, patients still value their doctor relationship and certain features of in-person visits. Resistance to telemedicine occurred on both individual and structural levels. This study has implications for institutions serving people with disabilities through remote means.

Measuring healthcare professionals' perceptions of their ability to adopt shared decision making: Translation and psychometric evaluation of the Danish version of the IcanSDM questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Shared  decision making in healthcare is a fundamental right for patients. Healthcare professionals' perception of their own abilities to enable shared decision making is crucial for implementing shared decision making within service. IcanSDM (I can shared decision making) is a brief measure to investigate healthcare professionals' perception of shared decision making approaches to their practices. It was developed in Canada with French and English versions, and recently translated into German. This study aims to adapt the IcanSDM measure for Danish-speaking healthcare professionals, and evaluate its psychometric properties.

METHODS

Cultural adaptation and translation based on Beaton et al.'s approach was applied. A forward translation by ten people and a backward translation by two people were performed. To assess comprehensibility, cognitive interviews were conducted with 24 healthcare professionals. Eighty healthcare professionals who were trained in shared decision making for either one hour (n = 65) or one day (n = 15) participated in the psychometric evaluation. The evaluation concerned acceptance, item characteristics, skewness, item difficulties, corrected item-total correlations, inter-item correlations, factorial structure, internal consistency, and responsiveness.

RESULTS

The forward and backward translation revealed few discrepancies, and participants understood the items well. The psychometric evaluation showed a high completion rate and acceptable item difficulties and discrimination values. Both the factor analysis and the internal consistency showed a 2-factor structure: 1) healthcare professionals' capacity to implement shared decision making; and 2) healthcare professionals' capacity to practise shared decision making. The IcanSDM_Danish obtained a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.74. The evaluation of responsiveness showed improvement, but was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

The IcanSDM_Danish has good cross-cultural validity and internal consistency, and a 2-factor structure. The IcanSDM_Danish is capable of providing reliable and valid measurement when evaluating constructed knowledge about shared decision making, and may be able to support the implementation of shared decision making training and evaluation of its impact.

"We will be the ones bearing the consequences": A qualitative study of barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making in hospital-based maternity care

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women involved in decisions about their care report better health outcomes for themselves and their children. Shared decision-making (SDM) is a priority for health services; however, there is limited research on factors that help and hinder SDM in hospital-based maternity settings. The purpose of this study was to explore barriers and facilitators to SDM in a large tertiary maternity care service from the perspectives of multiple stakeholders.

METHODS

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 39 participants including women, clinicians, health service administrators and decision-makers, and government policymakers. The interview guide and thematic analysis were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify barriers and facilitators to SDM.

RESULTS

Women expect to be included in decisions about their care. Health service administrators and decision-makers, government policymakers, and most clinicians want to include them in decisions. Key barriers to SDM included lack of care continuity, knowledge, and clinician skills, as well as professional role and decision-making factors. Key facilitators pertained to policy and guideline changes, increased knowledge, professional role factors, and social influences.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed common barriers and facilitators to SDM and highlighted the need to consider perspectives outside the patient-clinician dyad. It adds to the limited literature on barriers and facilitators to SDM in hospital care settings. Organizational- and system-wide changes to service delivery are necessary to facilitate SDM. These changes may be enabled by education and training, changes to policies and guidelines to include and support SDM, and adequately timed information provision to enable SDM conversations.

Evaluation of Community Involvement and Development in an Orthopedic Hospital

Improving healthcare requires appropriate community involvement supported by appropriate partner engagement methods. This research aims to develop a complex tool for evaluating the social responsibility of health facilities regarding community involvement and development. We developed areas of a new reference framework for the sustainability of healthcare organizations, which includes the area of community involvement and expansion. It is made up of nine indicators. These were designed using the most representative activities reported by hospitals around the world. Their testing was conducted in an orthopedic emergency hospital. The designed indicators are community engagement actions; the interventions' content adapted to the community; partnership and networking; the involvement of volunteers and training networks; the involvement and participation of professional associations; community-involved local opinion leaders; satisfaction with partnerships; initiatives together with the community; and educational visits. The testing and validation of health practices of the indicators highlighted their adequacy with the proposed purpose of the research and the promotion of sustainable development. We have also verified their compatibility with the requirements of national hospital accreditation legislation and the European framework for quality assurance in hospitals.

Development and evaluation of shared decision-making tools in rheumatology: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Shared decision-making (SDM) tools are facilitators of decision-making through a collaborative process between patients/caregivers and clinicians. These tools help clinicians understand patient's perspectives and help patients in making informed decisions based on their preferences. Despite their usefulness for both patients and clinicians, SDM tools are not widely implemented in everyday practice. One barrier is the lack of clarity on the development and evaluation processes of these tools. Such processes have not been previously described in the field of rheumatology.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the development and evaluation processes of shared decision-making (SDM) tools used in rheumatology.

METHODS

Bibliographic databases (e.g., EMBASE and CINAHL) were searched for relevant articles. Guidelines for the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews were followed. Studies included were: addressing SDM among adults in rheumatology, focusing on development and/or evaluation of SDM tool, full texts, empirical research, and in the English language.

RESULTS

Of the 2030 records screened, forty-six reports addressing 36 SDM tools were included. Development basis and evaluation measures varied across the studies. The most commonly reported development basis was the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) criteria (19/36, 53 %). Other developmental foundations reported were: The Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) (6/36, 16 %), Informed Medical Decision Foundation elements (3/36, 8 %), edutainment principles (2/36, 5.5 %), and others (e.g. DISCERN and MARKOV Model) (9/31,29 %). The most commonly used evaluation measures were the Decisional Conflict Scale (18/46, 39 %), acceptability and knowledge (7/46, 15 %), and the preparation for decision-making scale (5/46,11 %).

CONCLUSION

For better quality and wider implementation of such tools, there is a need for detailed, transparent, systematic, and consistent reporting of development methods and evaluation measures. Using established checklists for reporting development and evaluation is encouraged.

Barriers and Stimulus in Shared Decision Making Among Aesthetic Dermatologists in China: Findings from a Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

Shared decision making (SDM) is a collaborative process involving both healthcare providers and patients in making medical decisions, which gains increasing prominence in healthcare practice. But evidence on the level of SDM in medical practice and barriers as well as stimulus during the SDM implementation among aesthetic dermatologists is limited in China.

Methods

From July to August 2023, 1938 dermatologists were recruited online in China. Data were collected through an electronic questionnaire covering: (1) demographic features; (2) SDM questionnaire physician version (SDM-Q-Doc); and (3) stimulus and barriers in SDM implementation. Logistic regression was applied to explore factors associated with SDM practice, barriers, and stimulus of SDM implementation, respectively.

Results

The 1938 dermatologists included 1329 females (68.6%), with an average age of 35 years. The total SDM score ranged from 0 to 45, with a median value of 40 (IQR: 35-44), and the median stimulus score and barriers scores were 28 (IQR: 24-32) and 19 (IQR: 13-26), respectively. The prevalence of good SDM was 27.2%, logistic regression indicated that female dermatologists (odds ratio, OR=1.21, 95% confidence interval, CI: 0.96-1.51), and dermatologists with more years of aesthetic practice had a higher proportion of good SDM practice (OR was 1.44 for 5-9 years, 1.58 for 10-15 years and 1.77 for over 15 years). Moreover, female dermatologists and dermatologists with higher education level and serviced in private settings had lower barrier scores; female dermatologists and dermatologists with more years of aesthetic practice had higher stimulus scores.

Conclusion

Chinese aesthetic dermatologists appear to implement SDM at an active level, with more stimulus and less barriers in SDM implementation. The integration of SDM into clinical practice among dermatologists is beneficial both for patients and dermatologists. Moreover, SDM practice should be strongly promoted and enhanced during medical aesthetics, especially among male dermatologists, dermatologists with less working experience, and those who work at public institutions.

Multiple Myeloma: Validation of the Values and Preferences Elicitation Questionnaire- Cure and Survival Preference Scale (VPEQ-CSPS)

BACKGROUND

With the emergence of many novel therapies, the treatment decisions for multiple myeloma (MM) are increasingly guided by concerns of quality of life, achievement of cancer-free remission, living a longer overall survival, and a relentless search for a cure; however, the impact of various decision-making factors on patients' actual therapy choices and the patients' desire for cure and survival is mainly unknown. The lack of a valid and reliable measure for uncovering patients' preferences for cure and survival makes it more challenging to put this factor into the actual treatment decision equation.

PURPOSE

This study examined the psychometric properties of the Values and Preferences Elicitation Questionnaire-Cure and Survival Preference Scale (VPEQ-CSPS) instrument.

METHODS

The VPEQ-CSPS instrument was deployed using an anonymous Qualtrics online survey to patients diagnosed with MM within the network of International Myeloma Foundation online patient support groups across the United States. One hundred seventy-four (N = 174) valid responses were obtained and used to examine the validity and reliability of the VPEQ-CSPS.

RESULTS

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) revealed a Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin value of 0.72 indicating excellent sample adequacy. A statistically significant Bartlett's test of sphericity (P < .001) indicated significant correlations among the variables of the dataset to conduct the EFA. The internal consistency coefficients indicated adequate reliability of the instrument with Cronbach's alpha value at 0.80. The EFA and parallel analysis revealed the 5-item VPEQ-CSPS as a valid and reliable unidimensional scale that can be used by oncology clinicians to elicit their patient's preferences for cure and survival. This new instrument has the potential to contribute to the achievement of shared decision-making for myeloma treatment decisions.

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.

Prevalence and predictors of shared decision-making in goals-of-care clinician-family meetings for critically ill neurologic patients: a multi-center mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is a joint process where patients, or their surrogates, and clinicians make health choices based on evidence and preferences. We aimed to determine the extent and predictors of shared decision-making for goals-of-care discussions for critically ill neurological patients, which is crucial for patient-goal-concordant care but currently unknown.

METHODS

We analyzed 72 audio-recorded routine clinician-family meetings during which goals-of-care were discussed from seven US hospitals. These occurred for 67 patients with 72 surrogates and 29 clinicians; one hospital provided 49/72 (68%) of the recordings. Using a previously validated 10-element shared decision-making instrument, we quantified the extent of shared decision-making in each meeting. We measured clinicians' and surrogates' characteristics and prognostic estimates for the patient's hospital survival and 6-month independent function using post-meeting questionnaires. We calculated clinician-family prognostic discordance, defined as ≥ 20% absolute difference between the clinician's and surrogate's estimates. We applied mixed-effects regression to identify independent associations with greater shared decision-making.

RESULTS

The median shared decision-making score was 7 (IQR 5-8). Only 6% of meetings contained all 10 shared decision-making elements. The most common elements were "discussing uncertainty"(89%) and "assessing family understanding"(86%); least frequent elements were "assessing the need for input from others"(36%) and "eliciting the context of the decision"(33%). Clinician-family prognostic discordance was present in 60% for hospital survival and 45% for 6-month independent function. Univariate analyses indicated associations between greater shared decision-making and younger clinician age, fewer years in practice, specialty (medical-surgical critical care > internal medicine > neurocritical care > other > trauma surgery), and higher clinician-family prognostic discordance for hospital survival. After adjustment, only higher clinician-family prognostic discordance for hospital survival remained independently associated with greater shared decision-making (p = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

Fewer than 1 in 10 goals-of-care clinician-family meetings for critically ill neurological patients contained all shared decision-making elements. Our findings highlight gaps in shared decision-making. Interventions promoting shared decision-making for high-stakes decisions in these patients may increase patient-value congruent care; future studies should also examine whether they will affect decision quality and surrogates' health outcomes.

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.

"The Terminology Might Be Ahead of Practice": Embedding Shared Decision Making in Practice-Barriers and Facilitators to Implementation of SDM in the Context of Maternity Care

Background. It is a patient's right to be included in decisions about their health care. Implementing shared decision making (SDM) is important to enable active communication between clinicians and patients. Although health policy makers are increasingly mandating SDM implementation, SDM adoption has been slow. This study explored stakeholders' organizational- and system-level barriers and facilitators to implementing policy mandated SDM in maternity care in Victoria, Australia. Method. Twenty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants including clinicians, health service administrators and decision makers, and government policy makers. Data were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation. Results. Factors identified as facilitating SDM implementation included using a whole-of-system approach, providing additional implementation resources, correct documentation facilitated by electronic medical records, and including patient outcomes in measurement. Barriers included health service lack of capacity, unclear policy definitions of SDM, and policy makers' lack of resources to track implementation. Conclusion. This is the first study to our knowledge to explore barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation from the perspective of multiple actors following policy mandating SDM in tertiary health services in Australia. The primary finding was that there are concerns that SDM implementation policy is outpacing practice. Nonclinical staff play a crucial role translating policy to practice. Addressing organizational- and system-level barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation should be a key concern of health policy makers, health services, and staff.

Highlights

New government policies require shared decision making (SDM) implementation in hospitals.There is limited evidence for how to implement SDM in hospital settings.There are concerns SDM implementation policy is outpacing practice.Understanding and capacity for SDM varies considerably among stakeholders.Whole of system approaches and electronic medical records are seen to facilitate SDM.

Older age, kidney concordant diseases and the dilemma of adherence to guidelines: A narrative review

Evidence-based medicine is pivotal to contemporary clinical practice, and the excellence of a healthcare institution is measured by the adherence of its clinical staff to the clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) among other standards and policies. Following the recommendations of CPGs in older adults poses different challenges to prescribers. In this narrative review we explore research studies that assessed clinicians' adherence to CPGs when prescribing to older adults with chronic kidney disease and its concordant disorders, and to discuss the potential barriers and facilitators to better adherence to CPGs. Our review of the literature found that the adherence level to CPGs differed according to country, disease condition and healthcare setting. Clinicians' attitudes toward older adults and the CPGs, the unfamiliarity with the CPGs, and the lack of time, were commonly cited barriers. Interventions suggested to improve adherence to CPGs include direct mentoring, educational activities, and the integration of CPGs recommendations within hospital protocols and policies.