Literature DB >> 33671649

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

Marta Maes-Carballo1,2, Manuel Martín-Díaz3, Luciano Mignini4, Khalid Saeed Khan2,5, Rubén Trigueros6, Aurora Bueno-Cavanillas2,5,7.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess shared decision-making (SDM) knowledge, attitude and application among health professionals involved in breast cancer (BC) treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study based on an online questionnaire, sent by several professional societies to health professionals involved in BC management. There were 26 questions which combined demographic and professional data with some items measured on a Likert-type scale.
RESULTS: The participation (459/541; 84.84%) and completion (443/459; 96.51%) rates were high. Participants strongly agreed or agreed in 69.57% (16/23) of their responses. The majority stated that they knew of SDM (mean 4.43 (4.36-4.55)) and were in favour of its implementation (mean 4.58 (4.51-4.64)). They highlighted that SDM practice was not adequate due to lack of resources (3.46 (3.37-3.55)) and agreed on policies that improved its implementation (3.96 (3.88-4.04)). The main advantage of SDM for participants was patient satisfaction (38%), and the main disadvantage was the patients' paucity of knowledge to understand their disease (24%). The main obstacle indicated was the lack of time and resources (40%).
CONCLUSIONS: New policies must be designed for adequate training of professionals in integrating SDM in clinical practice, preparing them to use SDM with adequate resources and time provided.

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast cancer; longitudinal study; shared decision making; survey; use of shared decision making

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33671649      PMCID: PMC7926688          DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18042128

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health        ISSN: 1660-4601            Impact factor:   3.390


  28 in total

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

Authors:  Julie Haesebaert; Rhéda Adekpedjou; Jordie Croteau; Hubert Robitaille; France Légaré
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2019-04-04

2.  U.S. Survey of Shared Decision Making Use for Treating Pregnant Women Presenting with Opioid Use Disorder.

Authors:  Heather Howard; Katherine Freeman; Katie Clark
Journal:  Subst Use Misuse       Date:  2019-07-26       Impact factor: 2.164

3.  The Effect of Shared Decisionmaking on Patients' Likelihood of Filing a Complaint or Lawsuit: A Simulation Study.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Schoenfeld; Shelby Mader; Connor Houghton; Robert Wenger; Marc A Probst; David A Schoenfeld; Peter K Lindenauer; Kathleen M Mazor
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2019-01-03       Impact factor: 5.721

4.  Choice of rating scale labels: implication for minimizing patient satisfaction response ceiling effect in telemedicine surveys.

Authors:  Caterina Masino; Tony C M Lam
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 3.536

5.  Breast cancer patients' narrative experiences about communication during the oncology care process: a qualitative study.

Authors:  A Abt Sacks; L Perestelo-Perez; B Rodriguez-Martin; L Cuellar-Pompa; M Algara López; N González Hernández; P Serrano-Aguilar
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Care (Engl)       Date:  2015-09-28       Impact factor: 2.520

Review 6.  The SDM 3 Circle Model: A Literature Synthesis and Adaptation for Shared Decision Making in the Hospital.

Authors:  Stephanie Rennke; Patrick Yuan; Brad Monash; Rebecca Blankenburg; Ian Chua; Stephanie Harman; Debbie S Sakai; Adeena Khan; Joan F Hilton; Lisa Shieh; Jason Satterfield
Journal:  J Hosp Med       Date:  2017-10-18       Impact factor: 2.960

7.  Shared Decision Making Interventions: Theoretical and Empirical Evidence with Implications for Health Literacy.

Authors:  Dawn Stacey; Sophie Hill; Kirsten McCaffery; Laura Boland; Krystina B Lewis; Lidia Horvat
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2017

Review 8.  Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice.

Authors:  Glyn Elwyn; Dominick Frosch; Richard Thomson; Natalie Joseph-Williams; Amy Lloyd; Paul Kinnersley; Emma Cording; Dave Tomson; Carole Dodd; Stephen Rollnick; Adrian Edwards; Michael Barry
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-05-23       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 9.  Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review.

Authors:  Marta Maes-Carballo; Isabel Muñoz-Núñez; Manuel Martín-Díaz; Luciano Mignini; Aurora Bueno-Cavanillas; Khalid Saeed Khan
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2020-08-03       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Measuring shared decision-making and collaborative goal setting in community rehabilitation: a focused ethnography using cross-sectional surveys in Canada.

Authors:  Kiran Pohar Manhas; Karin Olson; Katie Churchill; Peter Faris; Sunita Vohra; Tracy Wasylak
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-08-20       Impact factor: 2.692

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Breast Cancer Care Quality Indicators in Spain: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Marta Maes-Carballo; Yolanda Gómez-Fandiño; Carlos Roberto Estrada-López; Ayla Reinoso-Hermida; Khalid Saeed Khan; Manuel Martín-Díaz; Aurora Bueno-Cavanillas
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-06-13       Impact factor: 3.390

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.