Friedemann Geiger1, Jürgen Kasper. 1. Tumor Center, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany. f.geiger@uksh.de
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Shared decision making (SDM) between patient and physician is an interpersonal process. Most SDM measures use the view of one party (patient, physician or observer) as a proxy to capture this process although these views typically diverge. This study suggests the compound measure SDM(MASS) (SDM Meeting its concept's ASSumptions) integrating these three perspectives in one single index. METHODS: SDM(MASS) was derived theoretically and compared empirically to unilateral perspectives of patients, physicians and observers by application to a data set of 10 physicians (40 consultations) receiving an SDM training. RESULTS: The constituting parts of SDM(MASS) were highly reliable (Cronbach's alpha .94; interrater reliability .74-.87). Unilateral appraisal of training effects was divergent. SDM(MASS) revealed no effect. CONCLUSION: SDM(MASS) combines noteworthy information about SDM processes from different viewpoints and thereby delivers plausible assessments. It could overcome immanent shortcomings of unilateral approaches. However, it is a complex measure needing further validation.
OBJECTIVE: Shared decision making (SDM) between patient and physician is an interpersonal process. Most SDM measures use the view of one party (patient, physician or observer) as a proxy to capture this process although these views typically diverge. This study suggests the compound measure SDM(MASS) (SDM Meeting its concept's ASSumptions) integrating these three perspectives in one single index. METHODS: SDM(MASS) was derived theoretically and compared empirically to unilateral perspectives of patients, physicians and observers by application to a data set of 10 physicians (40 consultations) receiving an SDM training. RESULTS: The constituting parts of SDM(MASS) were highly reliable (Cronbach's alpha .94; interrater reliability .74-.87). Unilateral appraisal of training effects was divergent. SDM(MASS) revealed no effect. CONCLUSION: SDM(MASS) combines noteworthy information about SDM processes from different viewpoints and thereby delivers plausible assessments. It could overcome immanent shortcomings of unilateral approaches. However, it is a complex measure needing further validation.
Authors: Kelsey A Bonfils; Sadaaki Fukui; Erin L Adams; Heidi M Hedrick; Michelle P Salyers Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2014-07-31 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Fania R Gärtner; Hanna Bomhof-Roordink; Ian P Smith; Isabelle Scholl; Anne M Stiggelbout; Arwen H Pieterse Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-02-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jürgen Kasper; Katrin Liethmann; Christoph Heesen; Daniel R Reissmann; Friedemann Geiger Journal: Health Expect Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Marleen Kunneman; Inge Henselmans; Fania R Gärtner; Hanna Bomhof-Roordink; Arwen H Pieterse Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2019-09-26 Impact factor: 2.583