Literature DB >> 30948650

Shared decision-making experienced by Canadians facing health care decisions: a Web-based survey.

Julie Haesebaert1, Rhéda Adekpedjou1, Jordie Croteau1, Hubert Robitaille1, France Légaré2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite health policy that promotes shared decision-making, it is not yet the norm in clinical practice. We aimed to assess how much shared decision-making Canadians experienced in health-related decisions in 2017.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey in January 2018 with a Web-based panel of Canadians representing all 10 provinces. We assessed their involvement in health-related decisions made with a health care professional over the previous year by asking about 1) discussion of choice of treatment or care plan, 2) presentation of advantages and disadvantages, 3) exploration of ideas and preferences, 4) discussion of preferred option and 5) match between preferred and actual level of participation. We computed an average shared decision-making score (range 1 [never] to 5 [always]). We presented characteristics of participants and responses using descriptive statistics and explored variations across sociodemographic factors, jurisdictions, geographical areas and care settings (home care or not) using multivariate weighted regressions.
RESULTS: Of the 1591 participants surveyed, 1010 (63.5%) reported receiving health care in the previous 12 months. The mean of the average shared decision-making score was 2.25/5 (standard deviation [SD] 1.16). After weighting, 42.8% of respondents reported that their health care professional often or always mentioned that they had a choice of treatment or care plan, 45.4% reported that advantages and disadvantages were often or always presented, 38.8% reported that they were often or always asked for their ideas or preferences, 40.2% reported that they were often or always asked about their preferred option, and 54.1% stated that their level of participation in decision-making often or always matched their preferred level of participation. Increasing age, rural setting, living in the province of Quebec and not being white significantly decreased the level of shared decision-making experienced. Older respondents (age ≥ 65 yr) receiving home care reported the least shared decision-making (mean score 1.7 [SD 0.5]).
INTERPRETATION: Canadians in all 10 provinces experienced a low degree of shared decision-making in 2017, with variations across sociodemographic factors, jurisdictions, care settings and geographical areas. Further efforts to foster implementation of shared decision-making are needed and should take these variations into account. Copyright 2019, Joule Inc. or its licensors.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 30948650      PMCID: PMC6450794          DOI: 10.9778/cmajo.20180202

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ Open        ISSN: 2291-0026


  14 in total

1.  Support Tools for Preference-Sensitive Decisions in Healthcare: Where Are We? Where Do We Go? How Do We Get There?

Authors:  Jan Ostermann; Derek S Brown; Janine A van Til; Nick Bansback; France Légaré; Deborah A Marshall; Meenakshi Bewtra
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  To share or not to share: When is shared decision making the best option?

Authors:  Guylène Thériault; Roland Grad; James A Dickinson; Pascale Breault; Harminder Singh; Neil R Bell; Olga Szafran
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 3.275

3. 

Authors:  Guylène Thériault; Roland Grad; James A Dickinson; Pascale Breault; Harminder Singh; Neil R Bell; Olga Szafran
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Shared decision-making in advanced kidney disease: a scoping review.

Authors:  Noel Engels; Gretchen N de Graav; Paul van der Nat; Marinus van den Dorpel; Anne M Stiggelbout; Willem Jan Bos
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-09-21       Impact factor: 3.006

5.  Factor Analysis and Psychometric Properties Adaption of Chinese Version of the Decisional Engagement Scale (DES-10).

Authors:  Feijie Wang; Lijie Huang; Hongmei Zhang; Hongxia Jiang; Xiaoxia Chang; Yinping Chu; Zhixia Wang; Xiaoli Zhang
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2020-10-22       Impact factor: 2.711

6.  Group medical consultation for osteoporosis: a prospective pilot study of patient experience in Canadian tertiary care.

Authors:  Emma O Billington; A Lynn Feasel; Jessica L VanDyke; Gregory A Kline
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2020-10-29       Impact factor: 5.386

7.  What older adults and their caregivers need for making better health-related decisions at home: a participatory mixed methods protocol.

Authors:  Claudia Lai; Paul Holyoke; Karine V Plourde; Simon Décary; France Légaré
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-11-09       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Evaluation of the Use of Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer: International Survey.

Authors:  Marta Maes-Carballo; Manuel Martín-Díaz; Luciano Mignini; Khalid Saeed Khan; Rubén Trigueros; Aurora Bueno-Cavanillas
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 3.390

9.  Understanding the public's role in reducing low-value care: a scoping review.

Authors:  Emma E Sypes; Chloe de Grood; Fiona M Clement; Jeanna Parsons Leigh; Liam Whalen-Browne; Henry T Stelfox; Daniel J Niven
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2020-04-07       Impact factor: 7.327

10.  Assessing Patient Confidence and Satisfaction about the Shared Decision-making Meetings for Planning Cancer Chemotherapy.

Authors:  Shadi S Alkhayyat; Hussain Hudairi; Rakan M Alqahtani; Waleed Alqulayti; Abdulelah Kinkar; Mohannad Alghamdi; Shihab Alhakami
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2019-12-22
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.