Literature DB >> 27168160

Shared Decision Making During Active Psychiatric Hospitalization: Assessment and Psychometric Properties.

Yaara Zisman-Ilani1, David Roe2, Isabelle Scholl3, Martin Härter3, Orit Karnieli-Miller4.   

Abstract

Encouraging patients to be involved in their care and enhancing shared decision making (SDM) have been advocated over the past two decades as means to enhance patient-centered care. However, one of the barriers to implementing SDM in medical consultations is the need to adapt this approach to various populations and medical settings, including mental health, and developing reliable and practical methods for measuring and assessing SDM. This article presents the psychometric properties and validity of an adapted scale, SDM-Q-9-Psy, that assesses SDM in routine care among psychiatric inpatients. Psychiatric inpatients were assigned into an SDM intervention cohort (n = 46) or a control cohort (n = 40). The adapted scale was administered after a decision-making process. The scale was subsequently psychometrically tested via factor and reliability analyses. It was also tested for convergent validity and for its ability to distinguish the degree of SDM between the intervention and control groups (construct validity). The SDM-Q-9-Psy scale yielded a Cronbach's α of .94. Convergent and construct validity parameters were good. The SDM-Q-9-Psy scale can be used to evaluate SDM from psychiatric inpatients' perspective and to provide rapid feedback to mental health professionals, enabling them to monitor their decision-making practice in real-time clinical consultations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27168160     DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2015.1099504

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Commun        ISSN: 1041-0236


  6 in total

Review 1.  [Shared decision-making in acute psychiatric medicine : Contraindication or a challenge?]

Authors:  S Heres; J Hamann
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 1.214

Review 2.  The quality of instruments to assess the process of shared decision making: A systematic review.

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

3.  Potential Unintended Consequences Of Recent Shared Decision Making Policy Initiatives.

Authors:  Jennifer Blumenthal-Barby; Douglas J Opel; Neal W Dickert; Daniel B Kramer; Brownsyne Tucker Edmonds; Keren Ladin; Monica E Peek; Jeff Peppercorn; Jon Tilburt
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 6.301

Review 4.  Use of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc) in intervention studies-A systematic review.

Authors:  Hanna Doherr; Eva Christalle; Levente Kriston; Martin Härter; Isabelle Scholl
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire: the entire process from translation to validation.

Authors:  Hamzah Alzubaidi; Amal Hussein; Kevin Mc Namara; Isabelle Scholl
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-04-04       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Shared Decision Making in Primary Care Based Depression Treatment: Communication and Decision-Making Preferences Among an Underserved Patient Population.

Authors:  Elizabeth B Matthews; Margot Savoy; Anuradha Paranjape; Diana Washington; Treanna Hackney; Danielle Galis; Yaara Zisman-Ilani
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2021-07-12       Impact factor: 4.157

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.