Literature DB >> 17083558

Inside the black box of shared decision making: distinguishing between the process of involvement and who makes the decision.

Adrian Edwards1, Glyn Elwyn.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making has practical implications for everyday health care. However, it stems from largely theoretical frameworks and is not widely implemented in routine practice. AIMS: We undertook an empirical study to inform understanding of shared decision making and how it can be operationalized more widely.
METHOD: The study involved patients visiting UK general practitioners already well experienced in shared decision making. After these consultations, semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted and analysed using the constant comparative method of content analysis.
RESULTS: All patients described at least some components of shared decision making but half appeared to perceive the decision as shared and half as 'patient-led'. However, patients exhibited some uncertainty about who had made the decision, reflecting different meanings of decision making from those described in the literature. A distinction is indicated between the process of involvement (option portrayal, exchange of information and exploring preferences for who makes the decision) and the actual decisional responsibility (who makes the decision). The process of involvement appeared to deliver benefits for patients, not the action of making the decision. Preferences for decisional responsibility varied during some consultations, generating unsatisfactory interactions when actual decisional responsibility did not align with patient preferences at that stage of a consultation. However, when conducted well, shared decision making enhanced reported satisfaction, understanding and confidence in the decisions.
CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners can focus more on the process of involving patients in decision making rather than attaching importance to who actually makes the decision. They also need to be aware of the potential for changing patient preferences for decisional responsibility during a consultation and address non-alignment of patient preferences with the actual model of decision making if this occurs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17083558      PMCID: PMC5060371          DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2006.00401.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  43 in total

Review 1.  Framework for teaching and learning informed shared decision making.

Authors:  A Towle; W Godolphin
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-09-18

2.  Paternalism or partnership? Patients have grown up-and there's no going back.

Authors:  A Coulter
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-09-18

3.  Shared decision making and risk communication in practice: a qualitative study of GPs' experiences.

Authors:  Adrian Edwards; Glyn Elwyn; Fiona Wood; Christine Atwell; Lindsay Prior; Helen Houston
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Shared decision-making in primary care: the neglected second half of the consultation.

Authors:  G Elwyn; A Edwards; P Kinnersley
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Doctor-patient communication about drugs: the evidence for shared decision making.

Authors:  F A Stevenson; C A Barry; N Britten; N Barber; C P Bradley
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 4.634

6.  Are patients' decision-making preferences being met?

Authors:  Sarah Ford; Theo Schofield; Tony Hope
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.377

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

Authors:  Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Diane Valade; Catherine Orlowski; Catherine Draus; Barbara Nabozny-Valerio; Susan Keiser
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Achieving involvement: process outcomes from a cluster randomized trial of shared decision making skill development and use of risk communication aids in general practice.

Authors:  G Elwyn; A Edwards; K Hood; M Robling; C Atwell; I Russell; M Wensing; R Grol
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 2.267

9.  Exploring doctor and patient views about risk communication and shared decision-making in the consultation.

Authors:  Ruth E Davis; Gina Dolan; Sue Thomas; Christine Atwell; Donna Mead; Sarah Nehammer; Laurie Moseley; Adrian Edwards; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Women's preferences for and views on decision-making for diagnostic tests.

Authors:  Heather M Davey; Jacqueline Lim; Phyllis N Butow; Alexandra L Barratt; Sally Redman
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 4.634

View more
  78 in total

1.  Arthritis patients' motives for (not) wanting to be involved in medical decision-making and the factors that hinder or promote patient involvement.

Authors:  Ingrid Nota; Constance H C Drossaert; Erik Taal; Mart A F J van de Laar
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 2.980

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

Authors:  Rajiv Samant; Inge Aivas; Jean-Marc Bourque; Tara Tucker
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.037

3.  Developing a framework to support shared decision making for youth mental health medication treatment.

Authors:  Elizabeth L Crickard; Megan S O'Brien; Charles A Rapp; Cheryl L Holmes
Journal:  Community Ment Health J       Date:  2010-06-23

4.  Patient participation in the discussions of options in Spanish primary care consultations.

Authors:  Roger Ruiz Moral; Lucía Peralta Munguía; Luis Ángel Pérula de Torres; Maria Teresa Carrión; Jorge Olloqui Mundet; Mariana Martínez
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Communicating risk using absolute risk reduction or prolongation of life formats: cluster-randomised trial in general practice.

Authors:  Charlotte Gry Harmsen; Ivar Sønbø Kristiansen; Pia Veldt Larsen; Jørgen Nexøe; Henrik Støvring; Dorte Gyrd-Hansen; Jesper Bo Nielsen; Adrian Edwards; Dorte Ejg Jarbøl
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 6.  Patients' perceptions of sharing in decisions: a systematic review of interventions to enhance shared decision making in routine clinical practice.

Authors:  France Légaré; Stéphane Turcotte; Dawn Stacey; Stéphane Ratté; Jennifer Kryworuchko; Ian D Graham
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.883

7.  Idealistic, impractical, impossible? Shared decision making in the real world.

Authors:  Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 5.386

8.  Measuring quality through performance. Respecting the subjective: quality measurement from the patient's perspective.

Authors:  Glyn Elwyn; Stephen Buetow; Judith Hibbard; Michel Wensing
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-11-17

9.  Views of treatment decision making from adolescents with chronic illnesses and their parents: a pilot study.

Authors:  Jennifer M Knopf; Richard W Hornung; Gail B Slap; Robert F DeVellis; Maria T Britto
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 10.  Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making: a systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument.

Authors:  Nicolas Couët; Sophie Desroches; Hubert Robitaille; Hugues Vaillancourt; Annie Leblanc; Stéphane Turcotte; Glyn Elwyn; France Légaré
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-03-04       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.