Marla L Clayman1, Carma L Bylund2, Betty Chewning3, Gregory Makoul4,5,6. 1. American Institutes for Research (MLC) 2. Hamad Medical Corporation/Weill Cornell Medical College-Qatar (CB) 3. School of Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI, USA (BC) 4. Connecticut Institute for Primary Care Innovation (GM) 5. Department of Medicine, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Hartford, CT, USA (GM) 6. PatientWisdom (GM)
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although there are compelling moral arguments for patient participation in medical decisions, the link to health outcomes has not been systematically explored. OBJECTIVE: Assess the extent to which patient participation in decision making within medical encounters is associated with measured patient outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a primary search in PubMed-excluding non-English and animal studies-for articles on decision making in the context of the physician-patient relationship published through the end of February 2015, using the MeSH headings (Physician-Patient Relations [MeSH] OR Patient Participation [MeSH]) and the terms (decision OR decisions OR option OR options OR choice OR choices OR alternative OR alternatives) in the title or abstract. We also conducted a secondary search of references in all articles that met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: A thorough search process yielded 116 articles for final analysis. There was wide variation in study design, as well as measurement of patient participation and outcomes, among the studies. Eleven of the 116 studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Interventions increased patient involvement in 10 (91%) of the 11 RCTs. At least one positive outcome was detected in 5 (50%) of the 10 RCTs reporting increased participation; the ratio of positive results among all outcome variables measured in these studies was much smaller. Although proportions differed, similar patterns were found across the 105 nonrandomized studies. CONCLUSIONS: Very few RCTs in the field have measures of participation in decision making and at least one health outcome. Moreover, extant studies exhibit little consistency in measurement of these variables, and results are mixed. There is a great need for well-designed, reproducible research on clinically relevant outcomes of patient participation in medical decisions.
BACKGROUND: Although there are compelling moral arguments for patient participation in medical decisions, the link to health outcomes has not been systematically explored. OBJECTIVE: Assess the extent to which patient participation in decision making within medical encounters is associated with measured patient outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a primary search in PubMed-excluding non-English and animal studies-for articles on decision making in the context of the physician-patient relationship published through the end of February 2015, using the MeSH headings (Physician-Patient Relations [MeSH] OR Patient Participation [MeSH]) and the terms (decision OR decisions OR option OR options OR choice OR choices OR alternative OR alternatives) in the title or abstract. We also conducted a secondary search of references in all articles that met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: A thorough search process yielded 116 articles for final analysis. There was wide variation in study design, as well as measurement of patient participation and outcomes, among the studies. Eleven of the 116 studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Interventions increased patient involvement in 10 (91%) of the 11 RCTs. At least one positive outcome was detected in 5 (50%) of the 10 RCTs reporting increased participation; the ratio of positive results among all outcome variables measured in these studies was much smaller. Although proportions differed, similar patterns were found across the 105 nonrandomized studies. CONCLUSIONS: Very few RCTs in the field have measures of participation in decision making and at least one health outcome. Moreover, extant studies exhibit little consistency in measurement of these variables, and results are mixed. There is a great need for well-designed, reproducible research on clinically relevant outcomes of patient participation in medical decisions.
Authors: Richard L Kravitz; Christopher H Schmid; Maria Marois; Barth Wilsey; Deborah Ward; Ron D Hays; Naihua Duan; Youdan Wang; Scott MacDonald; Anthony Jerant; Joseph L Servadio; David Haddad; Ida Sim Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Donald R Sullivan; Sara E Golden; Linda Ganzini; Renda Soylemez Wiener; Karen B Eden; Christopher G Slatore Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2017-11
Authors: Mina K Chung; Angela Fagerlin; Paul J Wang; Tinuola B Ajayi; Larry A Allen; Tina Baykaner; Emelia J Benjamin; Megan Branda; Kerri L Cavanaugh; Lin Y Chen; George H Crossley; Rebecca K Delaney; Lee L Eckhardt; Kathleen L Grady; Ian G Hargraves; Mellanie True Hills; Matthew M Kalscheur; Daniel B Kramer; Marleen Kunneman; Rachel Lampert; Aisha T Langford; Krystina B Lewis; Ying Lu; John M Mandrola; Kathryn Martinez; Daniel D Matlock; Sarah R McCarthy; Victor M Montori; Peter A Noseworthy; Kate M Orland; Elissa Ozanne; Rod Passman; Krishna Pundi; Dan M Roden; Elizabeth V Saarel; Monika M Schmidt; Samuel F Sears; Dawn Stacey; Randall S Stafford; Benjamin A Steinberg; Sojin Youn Wass; Jennifer M Wright Journal: Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol Date: 2021-12-06
Authors: Emily B Peterson; Jamie S Ostroff; Katherine N DuHamel; Thomas A D'Agostino; Marisol Hernandez; Mollie R Canzona; Carma L Bylund Journal: Prev Med Date: 2016-09-28 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Stephanie Rennke; Patrick Yuan; Brad Monash; Rebecca Blankenburg; Ian Chua; Stephanie Harman; Debbie S Sakai; Adeena Khan; Joan F Hilton; Lisa Shieh; Jason Satterfield Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2017-10-18 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Melanie de Looper; Julia C M van Weert; Barbara C Schouten; Sifra Bolle; Eric H J Belgers; Eric H Eddes; Ellen M A Smets Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2021-07-05 Impact factor: 5.428