For which decisions is Shared Decision Making considered appropriate?-A systematic review

被引:42
|
作者
van der Horst, Dorinde E. M. [1 ,2 ,3 ,7 ]
Garvelink, Mirjam M. [4 ]
Bos, Willem Jan W. [1 ,3 ]
Stiggelbout, Anne M. [5 ,6 ]
Pieterse, Arwen H. [5 ]
机构
[1] St Antonius Hosp, Dept Internal Med, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
[2] Santeon, Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] Leiden Univ, Dept Internal Med, Med Ctr, Leiden, Netherlands
[4] St Antonius Hosp, Dept Value Based Healthcare, Nieuwegein, Netherlands
[5] Leiden Univ, Dept Biomed Data Sci, Med Ctr, Leiden, Netherlands
[6] Erasmus Univ, Erasmus Sch Hlth Policy & Management, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[7] Herculespl 38, NL-3584 AA Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
Shared Decision Making; Decision types; Patient-provider communication; Medical decision making; Medical encounter; Systematic review; CENTERED CARE; PATIENT; MODEL; FRAMEWORK; ONCOLOGY; DISORDERS; ENCOUNTER; TYPOLOGY; CONSENT; LIMITS;
D O I
10.1016/j.pec.2022.09.015
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Objective: To identify decision characteristics for which SDM authors deem SDM appropriate or not, and what arguments are used. Methods: We applied two search strategies: we included SDM models from an earlier review (strategy 1) and conducted a new search in eight databases to include papers other than describing an SDM model, such as original research, opinion papers and reviews (strategy 2).Results: From the 92 included papers, we identified 18 decision characteristics for which authors deemed SDM appropriate, including preference-sensitive, equipoise and decisions where patient commitment is needed in imple-menting the decision. SDM authors indicated limits to SDM, especially when there are immediate life-saving measures needed. We identified four decision characteristics on which authors of different papers disagreed on whether or not SDM is appropriate.Conclusion: The findings of this review show the broad range of decision characteristics for which authors deem SDM appropriate, the ambiguity of some, and potential limits of SDM.Practice implications: The findings can stimulate clinicians to (re)consider pursuing SDM in situations in which they did not before. Additionally, it can inform SDM campaigns and educational programs as it shows for which decision situations SDM might be more or less challenging to practice.
引用
收藏
页码:3 / 16
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Physician attitudes toward shared decision making: A systematic review
    Pollard, Samantha
    Bansback, Nick
    Bryan, Stirling
    PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2015, 98 (09) : 1046 - 1057
  • [2] Key components of shared decision making models: a systematic review
    Bomhof-Roordink, Hanna
    Gartner, Fania R.
    Stiggelbout, Anne M.
    Pieterse, Arwen H.
    BMJ OPEN, 2019, 9 (12):
  • [3] Where Is the Evidence? A Systematic Review of Shared Decision Making and Patient Outcomes
    Shay, L. Aubree
    Lafata, Jennifer Elston
    MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2015, 35 (01) : 114 - 131
  • [4] The implementation of design methodologies for supporting shared decision making in healthcare services: A systematic review.
    Sanudo, Yeray
    Akoglu, Canan
    Rietjens, Judith A. C.
    Snelders, Dirk
    Stiggelbout, Anne M.
    Sierra-Perez, Jorge
    PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2025, 131
  • [5] College students, shared decision making, and the appropriate use of antibiotics for respiratory tract infections: A systematic literature review
    Blyer, Kristina
    Hulton, Linda
    JOURNAL OF AMERICAN COLLEGE HEALTH, 2016, 64 (04) : 334 - 341
  • [6] Shared decision making within goal setting in rehabilitation settings: A systematic review
    Rose, Alice
    Rosewilliam, Sheeba
    Soundy, Andrew
    PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2017, 100 (01) : 65 - 75
  • [7] Objective effects of shared decision making. A systematic review
    Munck, Stephane
    Caillault, Helene
    Vallot, S.
    EXERCER-LA REVUE FRANCOPHONE DE MEDECINE GENERALE, 2016, 27 (127): : 60 - 61
  • [8] Development of a program theory for shared decision-making: a realist review protocol
    Groot, Gary
    Waldron, Tamara
    Carr, Tracey
    McMullen, Linda
    Bandura, Lori-Ann
    Neufeld, Shelley-May
    Duncan, Vicky
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2017, 6
  • [9] Decision aids for promoting shared decision-making: A review of systematic reviews
    Park, Myonghwa
    Doan, Thao Thi-Thu
    Jung, Jihye
    Giap, Thi-Thanh-Tinh
    Kim, Jinju
    NURSING & HEALTH SCIENCES, 2024, 26 (01)
  • [10] The effects of shared decision-making compared to usual care for prostate cancer screening decisions: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Martinez-Gonzalez, Nahara Anani
    Neuner-Jehle, Stefan
    Plate, Andreas
    Rosemann, Thomas
    Senn, Oliver
    BMC CANCER, 2018, 18