Publication trends of shared decision making in 15 high impact medical journals: a full-text review with bibliometric analysis.

BACKGROUND: Shared Decision Making (SDM) is increasingly advocated as a model for medical decision making. However, there is still low use of SDM in clinical practice. High impact factor journals might represent an efficient way for its dissemination. We aimed to identify and characterize publication trends of SDM in 15 high impact medical journals. METHODS: We selected the 15 general and internal medicine journals with the highest impact factor publishing original articles, letters and editorials. We retrieved publications from 1996 to 2011 through the full-text search function on each journal website and abstracted bibliometric data. We included publications of any type containing the phrase "shared decision making" or five other variants in their abstract or full text. These were referred to as SDM publications. A polynomial Poisson regression model with logarithmic link function was used to assess the evolution across the period of the number of SDM publications according to publication characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 1285 SDM publications out of 229,179 publications in 15 journals from 1996 to 2011. The absolute number of SDM publications by journal ranged from 2 to 273 over 16 years. SDM publications increased both in absolute and relative numbers per year, from 46 (0.32% relative to all publications from the 15 journals) in 1996 to 165 (1.17%) in 2011. This growth was exponential (P < 0.01). We found fewer research publications (465, 36.2% of all SDM publications) than non-research publications, which included non-systematic reviews, letters, and editorials. The increase of research publications across time was linear. Full-text search retrieved ten times more SDM publications than a similar PubMed search (1285 vs. 119 respectively). CONCLUSION: This review in full-text showed that SDM publications increased exponentially in major medical journals from 1996 to 2011. This growth might reflect an increased dissemination of the SDM concept to the medical community.

Effective continuing professional development for translating shared decision making in primary care: A study protocol.

Background: Shared decision making (SDM) is a process by which a healthcare choice is made jointly by the healthcare professional and the patient. SDM is the essential element of patient-centered care, a core concept of primary care. However, SDM is seldom translated into primary practice. Continuing professional development (CPD) is the principal means by which healthcare professionals continue to gain, improve, and broaden the knowledge and skills required for patient-centered care. Our international collaboration seeks to improve the knowledge base of CPD that targets translating SDM into the clinical practice of primary care in diverse healthcare systems. Methods: Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), our project is to form an international, interdisciplinary research team composed of health services researchers, physicians, nurses, psychologists, dietitians, CPD decision makers and others who will study how CPD causes SDM to be practiced in primary care. We will perform an environmental scan to create an inventory of CPD programs and related activities for translating SDM into clinical practice. These programs will be critically assessed and compared according to their strengths and limitations. We will use the empirical data that results from the environmental scan and the critical appraisal to identify knowledge gaps and generate a research agenda during a two-day workshop to be held in Quebec City. We will ask CPD stakeholders to validate these knowledge gaps and the research agenda. Discussion: This project will analyse existing CPD programs and related activities for translating SDM into the practice of primary care. Because this international collaboration will develop and identify various factors influencing SDM, the project could shed new light on how SDM is implemented in primary care.

Publication trends of shared decision making in 15 high impact medical journals: a full-text review with bibliometric analysis.

BACKGROUND: Shared Decision Making (SDM) is increasingly advocated as a model for medical decision making. However, there is still low use of SDM in clinical practice. High impact factor journals might represent an efficient way for its dissemination. We aimed to identify and characterize publication trends of SDM in 15 high impact medical journals. METHODS: We selected the 15 general and internal medicine journals with the highest impact factor publishing original articles, letters and editorials. We retrieved publications from 1996 to 2011 through the full-text search function on each journal website and abstracted bibliometric data. We included publications of any type containing the phrase "shared decision making" or five other variants in their abstract or full text. These were referred to as SDM publications. A polynomial Poisson regression model with logarithmic link function was used to assess the evolution across the period of the number of SDM publications according to publication characteristics. RESULTS: We identified 1285 SDM publications out of 229,179 publications in 15 journals from 1996 to 2011. The absolute number of SDM publications by journal ranged from 2 to 273 over 16 years. SDM publications increased both in absolute and relative numbers per year, from 46 (0.32% relative to all publications from the 15 journals) in 1996 to 165 (1.17%) in 2011. This growth was exponential (P < 0.01). We found fewer research publications (465, 36.2% of all SDM publications) than non-research publications, which included non-systematic reviews, letters, and editorials. The increase of research publications across time was linear. Full-text search retrieved ten times more SDM publications than a similar PubMed search (1285 vs. 119 respectively). CONCLUSION: This review in full-text showed that SDM publications increased exponentially in major medical journals from 1996 to 2011. This growth might reflect an increased dissemination of the SDM concept to the medical community.

Shared decision-making in mental health care : a user perspective on decisional needs in community-based services

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) is an emergent research topic in the field of mental health care and is considered to be a central component of a recovery-oriented system. Despite the evidence suggesting the benefits of this change in the power relationship between users and practitioners, the method has not been widely implemented in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate decisional and information needs among users with mental illness as a prerequisite for the development of a decision support tool aimed at supporting SDM in community-based mental health services in Sweden. METHODS: Three semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted with 22 adult users with mental illness. The transcribed interviews were analyzed using a directed content analysis. This method was used to develop an in-depth understanding of the decisional process as well as to validate and conceptually extend Elwyn et al.'s model of SDM. RESULTS: The model Elwyn et al. have created for SDM in somatic care fits well for mental health services, both in terms of process and content. However, the results also suggest an extension of the model because decisions related to mental illness are often complex and involve a number of life domains. Issues related to social context and individual recovery point to the need for a preparation phase focused on establishing cooperation and mutual understanding as well as a clear follow-up phase that allows for feedback and adjustments to the decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The current study contributes to a deeper understanding of decisional and information needs among users of community-based mental health services that may reduce barriers to participation in decision-making. The results also shed light on attitudinal, relationship-based, and cognitive factors that are important to consider in adapting SDM in the mental health system.

Understanding and Characterizing Shared Decision-Making and Behavioral Intent in Medical Uncertainty

Applying Theoretical Constructs to Address Medical Uncertainty Situations involving medical reasoning usually include some level of medical uncertainty. Despite the identification of shared decision-making (SDM) as an effective technique, it has been observed that the likelihood of physicians and patients engaging in shared decision making is lower in those situations where it is most needed; specifically in circumstances of medical uncertainty. Having identified shared decision making as an effective, yet often a neglected approach to resolving a lack of information exchange in situations involving medical uncertainty, the next step is to determine the way(s) in which SDM can be integrated and the supplemental processes that may facilitate its integration. SDM involves unique types of communication and relationships between patients and physicians. Therefore, it is necessary to further understand and incorporate human behavioral elements - in particular, behavioral intent - in order to successfully identify and realize the potential benefits of SDM. This paper discusses the background and potential interaction between the theories of shared decision-making, medical uncertainty, and behavioral intent. Identifying Shared Decision-Making Elements in Medical Encounters Dealing with Uncertainty A recent summary of the state of medical knowledge in the U.S. reported that nearly half (47%) of all treatments were of unknown effectiveness, and an additional 7% involved an uncertain tradeoff between benefits and harms. Shared decision-making (SDM) was identified as an effective technique for managing uncertainty when two or more parties were involved. In order to understand which of the elements of SDM are used most frequently and effectively, it is necessary to identify these key elements, and understand how these elements related to each other and the SDM process. The elements identified through the course of the present research were selected from basic principles of the SDM model and the “Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom” (DIKW) Hierarchy. The goal of this ethnographic research was to identify which common elements of shared decision-making patients are most often observed applying in the medical encounter. The results of the present study facilitated the understanding of which elements patients were more likely to exhibit during a primary care medical encounter, as well as determining variables of interest leading to more successful shared decision-making practices between patients and their physicians. Understanding Behavioral Intent to Participate in Shared Decision-Making in Medically Uncertain Situations Objective: This article describes the process undertaken to identify and validate behavioral and normative beliefs and behavioral intent of men between the ages of 45-70 with regard to participating in shared decision-making in medically uncertain situations. This article also discusses the preliminary results of the aforementioned processes and explores potential future uses of this information which may facilitate greater understanding, efficiency and effectiveness of doctor-patient consultations.Design: Qualitative Study using deductive content analysisSetting: Individual semi-structure patient interviews were conducted until data saturation was reached. Researchers read the transcripts and developed a list of codes.Subjects: 25 subjects drawn from the Philadelphia community.Measurements: Qualitative indicators were developed to measure respondents’ experiences and beliefs related to behavioral intent to participate in shared decision-making during medical uncertainty. Subjects were also asked to complete the Krantz Health Opinion Survey as a method of triangulation.Results: Several factors were repeatedly described by respondents as being essential to participate in shared decision-making in medical uncertainty. These factors included past experience with medical uncertainty, an individual’s personality, and the relationship between the patient and his physician.Conclusions: The findings of this study led to the development of a category framework that helped understand an individual’s needs and motivational factors in their intent to participate in shared decision-making. The three main categories include 1) an individual’s representation of medically uncertainty, 2) how the individual copes with medical uncertainty, and 3) the individual’s behavioral intent to seek information and participate in shared decision-making during times of medically uncertain situations.

Dépistage des cancers en pratique clinique: une place privilégiée pour le partage de la décision. [Cancer screening in clinical practice: the value of shared decision-making]

Shared decision-making approach to uncertain clinical situations such as cancer screening seems more appropriate than ever. Shared decision making can be defined as an interactive process where physician and patient share all the stages of the decision making process. For patients who wish to be implicated in the management of their health conditions, physicians might express difficulty to do so. Use of patient decision aids appears to improve such process of shared decision making. L'incertitude quant à l'efficacité de certains dépistages de cancers et du traitement en cas de test positif rend l'application du partage de la décision particulièrement appropriée. Le concept du partage de la décision peut être défini comme un processus interactif où le médecin et le patient partagent les étapes du processus de décision. Face aux patients qui désirent être impliqués dans les décisions concernant leur santé, les médecins peinent parfois à le faire. Or, l'utilisation d'outils d'aide à la décision est un moyen efficace de favoriser ce partage de l'information et, si souhaité par le patient, de la décision.

Shared decision making development in Switzerland: room for improvement!

In Switzerland there is a strong movement at a national policy level towards strengthening patient rights and patient involvement in health care decisions. Yet, there is no national programme promoting shared decision making. First decision support tools (prenatal diagnosis and screening) for the counselling process have been developed and implemented. Although Swiss doctors acknowledge that shared decision making is important, hierarchical structures and asymmetric physician-patient relationships are still prevailing. The last years have seen some promising activities regarding the training of medical students and the development of patient support programmes. Swiss direct democracy and the habit of consensual decision making and citizen involvement in general may provide a fertile ground for SDM development in the primary care setting.

How can continuing professional development better promote shared decision-making? Perspectives from an international collaboration.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making is not widely implemented in healthcare. We aimed to set a research agenda about promoting shared decision-making through continuing professional development. METHODS: Thirty-six participants met for two days. RESULTS: Participants suggested ways to improve an environmental scan that had inventoried 53 shared decision-making training programs from 14 countries. Their proposed research agenda included reaching an international consensus on shared decision-making competencies and creating a framework for accrediting continuing professional development initiatives in shared decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Variability in shared decision-making training programs showcases the need for quality assurance frameworks.

Training primary care physicians in shared decision making for colorectal cancer screening : Insights from the first statewide colorectal cancer screening program in Switzerland

Background: The State of Vaud has launched the first population-based, organized, colorectal cancer screening program in Switzerland for the population aged 50 to 69. Each primary care physician (PCP) has been invited to participate in an interactive session preparing them to enroll patients in the screening program. We aimed at testing the impact of an interactive seminar for PCPs on their intention to discuss the options of no screening, screening with the fecal-immunological test (FIT) and colonoscopy. We measured attitude, intentions and knowledge through questionnaires filled by PCPs before and after a 2.5 hour-long interactive seminar. The main outcome was the proportion of physicians foreseeing to offer coloscopy vs FIT on an equal basis. Physicians estimated the proportion of their patients prescribed a fecal occult blood test (FOBT) vs coloscopy over the months before the seminar and after the interactive seminar. We used a clinical vignette to test for knowledge about screening indications. The interactive seminar included powerpoint presentations with quizzes and clickers, an 8-minute video presenting a shared decision making (SDM) consultation around CRC screening and distribution of educational materials such as a SDM decision aid and background epidemiological information.

Programme cantonal vaudois de dépistage du cancer colorectal: information et décision partagée [Shared decision making in the colorectal cancer screening program in the canton of Vaud].

Le programme cantonal vaudois de dépistage du cancer colorectal vise à faciliter ce dépistage pour la population de 50 à 69 ans. Les deux modalités retenues sont la recherche immunologique de sang dans les selles (FIT) et la coloscopie. La décision de réaliser un test de dépistage et la modalité de dépistage s'appuient sur une consultation individuelle avec un médecin de famille. L'assurance de base prend en charge le remboursement. Le programme vaudois permet l'exemption de la franchise pour la consultation médicale d'information et les deux modalités de dépistage, ainsi que pour la coloscopie de confirmation en cas de test FIT positif. La quote-part de 10 % reste à charge des participants. Des outils de communication ont été développés pour faciliter un entretien de décision partagée dans le cadre d'une consultation médicale. The colorectal cancer screening program of the canton of Vaud aims to facilitate screening for this cancer for the population aged 50 to 69 years old. The two screening modalities offered are fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) and colonoscopy. The decision to undergo screening and the screening modality is based on an individual medical encounter with a primary care physician. Both screening modalities are reimbursed through basic health coverage in Switzerland. The participation to the screening program allows the exemption of the deductible for the medical encounter and the chosen screening modality. A copay of 10% is maintained for all costs. Communication tools were developed on the basis of recommendations in the literature to facilitate shared decision-making in a medical encounter.