Helen Cheng1, Daniel Hayes1,2, Julian Edbrooke-Childs2, Kate Martin3, Louise Chapman2, Miranda Wolpert1,2. 1. Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK. 2. Evidence Based Practice Unit, UCL and Anna Freud Centre, London, UK. 3. Common Room Consulting Ltd., London, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Whilst the benefits of shared decision-making (SDM) have been promoted across different health settings, its implementation is complex, particularly for children and young people with mental health difficulties. The aim of this scoping review was to identify and describe SDM approaches (tools, techniques, and technologies) used in child and youth mental health. METHOD: Electronic databases and grey literature were searched. Papers were included if they satisfied these criteria: English language; described an SDM approach (tool, technique, or technology); included sufficient detail on the SDM approach for quality assessment; did not use only a questionnaire to provide feedback on SDM or related concepts (e.g., therapeutic alliance) without another SDM approach; child or adolescent population (up to 18 years); carers of children or adolescents; and mental health setting. Screening and data extraction were performed by two co-authors, and each included record was quality assessed against a set of essential ingredients of SDM identified by previous studies. RESULTS: Of the 8,153 initial results, 22 were eligible for final inclusion. These could be grouped into six approaches: therapeutic techniques, psychoeducational information, decision aids, action planning or goal setting, discussion prompts, and mobilizing patients to engage. The quality of approaches identified ranged from one to seven of the nine essential elements of SDM. CONCLUSION: Evidence suggests that a range of approaches are being developed to support SDM in child and youth mental health. Rigorous research evaluating the effectiveness of these approaches is urgently needed, particularly from the perspective of children and young people.
OBJECTIVE: Whilst the benefits of shared decision-making (SDM) have been promoted across different health settings, its implementation is complex, particularly for children and young people with mental health difficulties. The aim of this scoping review was to identify and describe SDM approaches (tools, techniques, and technologies) used in child and youth mental health. METHOD: Electronic databases and grey literature were searched. Papers were included if they satisfied these criteria: English language; described an SDM approach (tool, technique, or technology); included sufficient detail on the SDM approach for quality assessment; did not use only a questionnaire to provide feedback on SDM or related concepts (e.g., therapeutic alliance) without another SDM approach; child or adolescent population (up to 18 years); carers of children or adolescents; and mental health setting. Screening and data extraction were performed by two co-authors, and each included record was quality assessed against a set of essential ingredients of SDM identified by previous studies. RESULTS: Of the 8,153 initial results, 22 were eligible for final inclusion. These could be grouped into six approaches: therapeutic techniques, psychoeducational information, decision aids, action planning or goal setting, discussion prompts, and mobilizing patients to engage. The quality of approaches identified ranged from one to seven of the nine essential elements of SDM. CONCLUSION: Evidence suggests that a range of approaches are being developed to support SDM in child and youth mental health. Rigorous research evaluating the effectiveness of these approaches is urgently needed, particularly from the perspective of children and young people.
Authors: Louise Chapman; Julian Edbrooke-Childs; Kate Martin; Helen Webber; Michael P Craven; Chris Hollis; Jessica Deighton; Roslyn Law; Peter Fonagy; Miranda Wolpert Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2017-10-30
Authors: Ingrid Larsson; Petra Svedberg; Susann Arvidsson; Jens M Nygren; Ing-Marie Carlsson Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-11-05 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Kanika Malik; Daniel Michelson; Aoife M Doyle; Helen A Weiss; Giulia Greco; Rooplata Sahu; James E J; Sonal Mathur; Paulomi Sudhir; Michael King; Pim Cuijpers; Bruce Chorpita; Christopher G Fairburn; Vikram Patel Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2021-09-28 Impact factor: 11.069