INTRODUCTION: Patient decision aids could facilitate shared decision-making in joint replacement surgery. However, patient decision aids are not routinely used in this setting. METHODS: With a view to developing a patient decision aid for UK hip/knee joint replacement practice, we undertook a systematic search of the literature for evidence on the use of shared decision-making and patient decision aids in orthopaedics, and a national survey of consultant orthopaedic surgeons on the potential acceptability and feasibility of patient decision aids. RESULTS: We found little published evidence regarding shared decision-making or patient decision aids in orthopaedics. In the survey, 362 of 639 (57%) randomly selected consultant orthopaedic surgeons responded. Respondents appear representative of consultant orthopaedic surgeons in the UK. Of 272 valid responses, 79% (95% CI, 73-85%) thought patient decision aids a good or excellent idea. There was consensus on the potential helpfulness of patient decision aids and core content. A booklet to take home was the preferred medium/practice model. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the increased emphasis on patient involvement in decision-making, there is little evidence in the medical literature relating to shared decision-making or the use of patient decision aids in orthopaedic surgery. Further research in this area of clinical practice is required. Our survey shows that consultant orthopaedic surgeons in the UK are generally positive about the use of patient decision aids for joint replacement surgery. Survey results could inform future development of patient decision aids for joint replacement practice in the UK.
INTRODUCTION:Patient decision aids could facilitate shared decision-making in joint replacement surgery. However, patient decision aids are not routinely used in this setting. METHODS: With a view to developing a patient decision aid for UK hip/knee joint replacement practice, we undertook a systematic search of the literature for evidence on the use of shared decision-making and patient decision aids in orthopaedics, and a national survey of consultant orthopaedic surgeons on the potential acceptability and feasibility of patient decision aids. RESULTS: We found little published evidence regarding shared decision-making or patient decision aids in orthopaedics. In the survey, 362 of 639 (57%) randomly selected consultant orthopaedic surgeons responded. Respondents appear representative of consultant orthopaedic surgeons in the UK. Of 272 valid responses, 79% (95% CI, 73-85%) thought patient decision aids a good or excellent idea. There was consensus on the potential helpfulness of patient decision aids and core content. A booklet to take home was the preferred medium/practice model. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the increased emphasis on patient involvement in decision-making, there is little evidence in the medical literature relating to shared decision-making or the use of patient decision aids in orthopaedic surgery. Further research in this area of clinical practice is required. Our survey shows that consultant orthopaedic surgeons in the UK are generally positive about the use of patient decision aids for joint replacement surgery. Survey results could inform future development of patient decision aids for joint replacement practice in the UK.
Authors: S Molenaar; M A Sprangers; F C Postma-Schuit; E J Rutgers; J Noorlander; J Hendriks; H C de Haes Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2000 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: E A Phelan; R A Deyo; D C Cherkin; J N Weinstein; M A Ciol; W Kreuter; J F Howe Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2001-01-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Jocalyn P Clark; Pamela L Hudak; Gillian A Hawker; Peter C Coyte; Nizar N Mahomed; Hans J Kreder; James G Wright Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Ian D Graham; Jo Logan; Annette O'Connor; Karen E Weeks; Shawn Aaron; Ann Cranney; Robert Dales; Thomas Elmslie; Paul Hebert; Elaine Jolly; Andreas Laupacis; Susan Mitchell; Peter Tugwell Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2003-07
Authors: S Samuel Bederman; Charles D Rosen; Nitin N Bhatia; P Douglas Kiester; Ranjan Gupta Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2011-08-05 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Charlotte J Hagerman; Paula G Bellini; Kim M Davis; Richard M Hoffman; David S Aaronson; Daniel Y Leigh; Riley E Zinar; David Penson; Stephen Van Den Eeden; Kathryn L Taylor Journal: Health Educ Res Date: 2017-04-01
Authors: Jonathan L Berliner; Dane J Brodke; Vanessa Chan; Nelson F SooHoo; Kevin J Bozic Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 4.176