Literature DB >> 33533921

Shared Decision-Making in Dermatology: A Scoping Review.

Tessalyn Morrison1, Jacob Johnson1, Wenelia Baghoomian1, Andrew Hamilton1, Eric Simpson1, Teri Greiling1, Erin Foster1.   

Abstract

Importance: Shared decision-making (SDM) can improve the quality of care for patients. The extent to which this tool has been used and the evidence supporting its use in dermatology have not been systematically examined. Objective: To perform a scoping review of the literature regarding SDM in dermatology. Evidence Review: Searches of Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Sciverse Scopus, and EBM Reviews were conduced on July 11, 2019, and March 6, 2020. There were no limits on date, type of article, language, or subject for the initial search. A total of 1673 titles and abstracts were screened by 2 independent reviewers in the Covidence mixed-methods platform. Forty-one full-text studies were assessed for eligibility. For inclusion, articles needed to include a dermatologic diagnosis as well as discussion of SDM or patient decision aids. Two independent reviewers screened 29 full-text articles for inclusion and extracted qualitative data using a set of 26 predefined codes. Qualitative coding was applied to excerpts to categorize the article, define and describe advantages and disadvantages of SDM, understand patient and physician requests for SDM, and discuss methods of implementation. Findings: Despite a small number of articles on SDM (n = 29) in dermatology, the selected literature provided consistent messages regarding the importance of SDM for dermatology and a number of strategies and tools for implementation. Medical dermatology was the most common subspecialty studied, with melanoma, psoriasis, and connective tissue diseases most examined. Only 5 publications introduced SDM tools specifically for dermatologic conditions; of these, only 2 tools were validated. Barriers to implementation that were cited included time and a lack of training for clinicians, although the literature also provided potential solutions to these issues. All articles emphasized the value of SDM for both patients and physicians. Conclusions and Relevance: The literature regarding SDM in dermatology consistently suggests that it is a useful tool for providing patient-centered care. Established tools have been proposed since 2012. More research is needed to implement better practices, especially in dermatologic subspecialties. However, there are substantial suggestions from the literature for strategies and tools with which to begin a shared decision-making practice.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33533921     DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.5362

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Dermatol        ISSN: 2168-6068            Impact factor:   10.282


  4 in total

1.  Clinician-created educational video for shared decision-making in the outpatient management of acne.

Authors:  Chih-Tsung Hung; Yi-Hsien Chen; Tzu-Ling Hung; Chien-Ping Chiang; Chih-Yu Chen; Wei-Ming Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 3.752

2.  The relationship between evaluation of shared decision-making by pet owners and veterinarians and satisfaction with veterinary consultations.

Authors:  Yuma Ito; Hirono Ishikawa; Asuka Suzuki; Mio Kato
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2022-08-02       Impact factor: 2.792

3.  Evidence should inform more than prescribing decisions.

Authors:  Fiona Cowdell
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2022-05-01       Impact factor: 11.113

4.  How do dermatologists' personal models inform a patient-centred approach to management: a qualitative study using the example of prescribing a new treatment (Apremilast).

Authors:  Rachael M Hewitt; Chris Bundy; Antonia-Luise Newi; Evangelos Chachos; Rachel Sommer; C Elise Kleyn; Matthias Augustin; Christopher E M Griffiths; Christine Blome
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2022-05-25       Impact factor: 11.113

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.