Literature DB >> 31142205

Decisional Conflict Scale Findings among Patients and Surrogates Making Health Decisions: Part II of an Anniversary Review.

Mirjam M Garvelink1, Laura Boland2, Krystal Klein3, Don Vu Nguyen1, Matthew Menear1,4, Hilary L Bekker5, Karen B Eden6, Annie LeBlanc4, Annette M O'Connor2, Dawn Stacey2,7, France Légaré1,4.   

Abstract

Background. We explored decisional conflict as measured with the 16-item Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and how it varies across clinical situations, decision types, and exposure to decision support interventions (DESIs). Methods. An exhaustive scoping review was conducted using backward citation searches and keyword searches. Eligible studies were published between 1995 and March 2015, used an original experimental/observational research design, concerned a health-related decision, and provided DCS data. Dyads independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, and extracted data. We performed narrative syntheses and calculated average or median DCS scores. Results. We included 246 articles reporting on 253 studies. DCS scores ranged from 2.4 to 89.6 out of 100. Highest baseline DCS scores were for care planning (30.5 ± 12.8, median = 30.9) and treatment decisions (30.5 ± 14.6, median = 28.0), in contexts of primary care (33.8 ± 19.8), obstetrics/gynecology (28.8 ± 10.4), and geriatrics (32.6 ± 10.7). Baseline scores were high among decision makers who were ill (29.5 ± 13.8, median = 27.2) or making decisions for themselves (29.7 ± 14.8, median = 26.9). Total DCS scores <25 out of 100 were associated with implementing decisions. Without DESIs, DCS scores tended to increase shortly after decision making (>37.4). After DESI use, DCS scores decreased short-term but increased or remained the same long-term (>6 months). Conclusions. DCS scores were highest at baseline and decreased after decision making. DESIs decreased decisional conflict immediately after decision making. The largest improvements after DESIs were in decision makers who were ill, male, or made decisions for themselves. Meta-analyses focusing on decision types, contexts, and interventions could inform hypotheses about the expected effects of DESIs, the best timing for measurement, and interpretation of DCS scores.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Decisional Conflict Scale; Shared Decision Making; decisional conflict; measurement; scoping review

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31142205     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X19851346

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  13 in total

1.  Evaluation of a computerized contraceptive decision aid: A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Tessa Madden; Jessica Holttum; Ragini Maddipati; Gina M Secura; Robert F Nease; Jeffrey F Peipert; Mary C Politi
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 3.375

2.  Measuring what really matters: Screening in primary care.

Authors:  Neil R Bell; Guylène Thériault; Harminder Singh; Roland Grad
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 3.275

3. 

Authors:  Neil R Bell; Guylène Thériault; Harminder Singh; Roland Grad
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Decisional Satisfaction, Regret, and Conflict Among Parents of Infants with Neurologic Conditions.

Authors:  Margaret H Barlet; Peter A Ubel; Kevin P Weinfurt; Hannah C Glass; Kathryn I Pollak; Debra H Brandon; Monica E Lemmon
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2022-02-26       Impact factor: 6.314

5.  Effect of a Patient-Centered Decision Support Tool on Rates of Trial of Labor After Previous Cesarean Delivery: The PROCEED Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Miriam Kuppermann; Anjali J Kaimal; Cinthia Blat; Juan Gonzalez; Mari-Paule Thiet; Yamilee Bermingham; Anna L Altshuler; Allison S Bryant; Peter Bacchetti; William A Grobman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-06-02       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  A patient decision aid for breast cancer patients deciding on their radiation treatment, no change in decisional conflict but better informed choices.

Authors:  D B Raphael; N S Russell; B Winkens; J M Immink; P G Westhoff; M C Stenfert Kroese; M R Stam; N Bijker; C M J van Gestel; T van der Weijden; L J Boersma
Journal:  Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-08-29

7.  Psychometric Evaluation of the Chinese Version of Decisional Conflict Scale in Chinese Young Women Making HPV Vaccination Decisions.

Authors:  Zi Han Zhai; Jun Hao Ning; Linda Dong-Ling Wang
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 2.711

8.  Decision coaching using a patient decision aid for youth and parents considering insulin delivery methods for type 1 diabetes: a pre/post study.

Authors:  Margaret L Lawson; Allyson L Shephard; Bryan Feenstra; Laura Boland; Nadia Sourial; Dawn Stacey
Journal:  BMC Pediatr       Date:  2020-01-03       Impact factor: 2.125

9.  Decisional Conflict after Deciding on Potential Participation in Early Phase Clinical Cancer Trials: Dependent on Global Health Status, Satisfaction with Communication, and Timing.

Authors:  Liza G G van Lent; Maja J A de Jonge; Mirte van der Ham; Marjolein van Mil; Eelke H Gort; Jeroen Hasselaar; Esther Oomen-de Hoop; Carin C D van der Rijt; Julia C M van Weert; Martijn P Lolkema
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-15       Impact factor: 6.639

10.  Can Upstream Patient Education Improve Fracture Care in a Digital World? Use of a Decision Aid for the Treatment of Displaced Diaphyseal Clavicle Fractures.

Authors:  Cara H Lai; Malcolm R DeBaun; Noelle Van Rysselberghe; Geoffrey D Abrams; Robin N Kamal; Julius A Bishop; Michael J Gardner
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 2.884

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.