France Légaré1, Philippe Thompson-Leduc2. 1. Research Centre of the CHU of Québec, St-François d'Assise Hospital, Québec, Canada; Department of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Laval University, Québec, Canada. Electronic address: france.legare@mfa.ulaval.ca. 2. Research Centre of the CHU of Québec, St-François d'Assise Hospital, Québec, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: As shared decision makes increasing headway in healthcare policy, it is under more scrutiny. We sought to identify and dispel the most prevalent myths about shared decision making. METHODS: In 20 years in the shared decision making field one of the author has repeatedly heard mention of the same barriers to scaling up shared decision making across the healthcare spectrum. We conducted a selective literature review relating to shared decision making to further investigate these commonly perceived barriers and to seek evidence supporting their existence or not. RESULTS: Beliefs about barriers to scaling up shared decision making represent a wide range of historical, cultural, financial and scientific concerns. We found little evidence to support twelve of the most common beliefs about barriers to scaling up shared decision making, and indeed found evidence to the contrary. CONCLUSION: Our selective review of the literature suggests that twelve of the most commonly perceived barriers to scaling up shared decision making across the healthcare spectrum should be termed myths as they can be dispelled by evidence. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our review confirms that the current debate about shared decision making must not deter policy makers and clinicians from pursuing its scaling up across the healthcare continuum.
OBJECTIVE: As shared decision makes increasing headway in healthcare policy, it is under more scrutiny. We sought to identify and dispel the most prevalent myths about shared decision making. METHODS: In 20 years in the shared decision making field one of the author has repeatedly heard mention of the same barriers to scaling up shared decision making across the healthcare spectrum. We conducted a selective literature review relating to shared decision making to further investigate these commonly perceived barriers and to seek evidence supporting their existence or not. RESULTS: Beliefs about barriers to scaling up shared decision making represent a wide range of historical, cultural, financial and scientific concerns. We found little evidence to support twelve of the most common beliefs about barriers to scaling up shared decision making, and indeed found evidence to the contrary. CONCLUSION: Our selective review of the literature suggests that twelve of the most commonly perceived barriers to scaling up shared decision making across the healthcare spectrum should be termed myths as they can be dispelled by evidence. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our review confirms that the current debate about shared decision making must not deter policy makers and clinicians from pursuing its scaling up across the healthcare continuum.
Authors: Karine Toupin-April; Jennifer Barton; Liana Fraenkel; Linda Li; Viviane Grandpierre; Francis Guillemin; Tamara Rader; Dawn Stacey; France Légaré; Janet Jull; Jennifer Petkovic; Marieke Scholte-Voshaar; Vivian Welch; Anne Lyddiatt; Cathie Hofstetter; Maarten De Wit; Lyn March; Tanya Meade; Robin Christensen; Cécile Gaujoux-Viala; Maria E Suarez-Almazor; Annelies Boonen; Christoph Pohl; Richard Martin; Peter S Tugwell Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2015-04-15 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Stephanie M Harman; Rebecca Blankenburg; Jason M Satterfield; Brad Monash; Stephanie Rennke; Patrick Yuan; Debbie S Sakai; Eric Huynh; Ian Chua; Joan F Hilton Journal: Acad Med Date: 2019-07 Impact factor: 6.893
Authors: Jonathan M Iaccarino; James Simmons; Michael K Gould; Christopher G Slatore; Steven Woloshin; Lisa M Schwartz; Renda Soylemez Wiener Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2017-06
Authors: Karla T Washington; Debra Parker Oliver; L Ashley Gage; David L Albright; George Demiris Journal: Palliat Med Date: 2015-08-17 Impact factor: 4.762