The impact and utility of encounter patient decision aids: Systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative synthesis

Scalia, Peter; Durand, Marie-Anne; Berkowitz, Julia; Ramesh, Nithya; Faber, Marjan J.; Kremer, J.A.M.; Elwyn, Glyn

doi:10.1016/j.pec.2018.12.020

Cited by 100 publications

(94 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Clinicians and their leadership may also use a variety of other approaches to incorporate SDM into routine practice, including decision aids and informal discussions. Many patient decision aids have been developed to facilitate discussions regarding the benefits and risks of various treatment options in medical settings (eg, by providing digital flow charts), and these have resulted in an increased uptake of SDM approaches . Clinicians may also use less formal methods for discussing SDM with patients.…”

Section: Recommendations For Sdm In Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many patient decision aids have been developed to facilitate discussions regarding the benefits and risks of various treatment options in medical settings (eg, by providing digital flow charts), and these have resulted in an increased uptake of SDM approaches. 69 Clinicians may also use less formal methods for discussing SDM with patients. One framework for facilitating this process includes letting the patient know that there is a choice they can make ("choice talk"), presenting options to the patient ("option talk)," and incorporating the patient into the decision-making process ("decision talk").…”

Section: Recommendations For Sdm In Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Shared decision‐making in mental and behavioural health interventions

Trusty

Penix

Dimmick

et al. 2019

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Elements of shared decision‐making (ie, collaboration, patient preferences, and working alliance) have long been discussed and studied in the field of clinical psychology; however, research indicates that shared decision‐making is not typically used in clinical practice. Instead, clinicians often rely on a paternalistic approach. In this article, we provide a narrative review of the existing research supporting shared decision‐making for mental and behavioural health concerns, we discuss several barriers that impede its use in actual clinical practice, and we provide recommendations for increasing shared decision‐making when working with patients.

show abstract

Section: Recommendations For Sdm In Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recommendations For Sdm In Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Shared decision‐making in mental and behavioural health interventions

Trusty

Penix

Dimmick

et al. 2019

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…PCC for Mr. G was facilitated via various critical enablers, detailed in the following: Information technology: The medical documentation and information (in the patient records) as well as the commonly formulated treatment and health plan are digitalized and accessible to Mr. G and his providers in a way that he comprehends and can agree or ask questions about. In formulating the health plan, Mr. G was supported by a digital patient decision aid [40]. Health information technology (IT) systems support the smooth flow of information between services, and to and from citizens and their families.…”

Section: The Illness Story Of Mr G: An Example Of the Enablers Of Pcmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting Innovative Person-Centred Care in Financially Constrained Environments: The WE CARE Exploratory Health Laboratory Evaluation Strategy

Lloyd

Ekman

Rogers

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COST CARES project aims to support healthcare cost containment and improve healthcare quality across Europe by developing the research and development necessary for person-centred care (PCC) and health promotion. This paper presents an overview evaluation strategy for testing 'Exploratory Health Laboratories' to deliver these aims. Our strategy is theory driven and evidence based, and developed through a multi-disciplinary and European-wide team. Specifically, we define the key approach and essential criteria necessary to evaluate initial testing, and on-going large-scale implementation with a core set of accompanying methods (metrics, models, and measurements). This paper also outlines the enabling mechanisms that support the development of the "Health Labs" towards innovative models of ethically grounded and evidenced-based PCC.

show abstract

“…Additionally, the everexpanding universe of medical knowledge, and the revision of paradigms previously considered sacrosanct (for example, daily aspirin in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease 3 ), constantly shifts the boundaries of certainty and uncertainty. Newer ways of including patients in shared decision-making conversations, including transparently using decision aids or risk calculators to collaborate on an ultimate treatment plan, 4,5 are beginning to address some of the epistemic uncertainty in some of these complex decisions. Again, however, at the same time that we may decrease epistemic uncertainty, we may increase a form of aleatoric uncertainty: the sheer amount of information may overload patients, preventing them from grasping nuances to make a truly informed decision.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%