scholarly journals Core Competencies for Shared Decision Making Training Programs: Insights From an International, Interdisciplinary Working Group

2013 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 267-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
France Légaré ◽  
Nora Moumjid-Ferdjaoui ◽  
Renée Drolet ◽  
Dawn Stacey ◽  
Martin Härter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Core Competencies ◽  
Shared Decision

What Motivates Family Physicians to Participate in Training Programs in Shared Decision Making?

2012 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 98-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Sophie Allaire ◽  
Michel Labrecque ◽  
Anik Giguere ◽  
Marie-Pierre Gagnon ◽  
France Légaré
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Family Physicians ◽  
Shared Decision

scholarly journals Development of a contemporary evidence-based practice workshop for health professionals with a focus on pre-appraised evidence and shared decision-making: a before-after pilot study

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 1.2-2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loai Albarqouni ◽  
Paul Glasziou ◽  
Mina Bakhit ◽  
Chris Del Mar ◽  
Tammy C Hoffmann
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Core Competencies ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
International Consensus ◽  
Feedback Questionnaire ◽  
Approach To Teaching ◽  
Strongly Agree

Shared decision-making (SDM) has emerged as a key skill to assist clinicians in applying evidence-based practice (EBP). We aimed to develop and pilot a new approach to teaching EBP, which focuses on teaching knowledge and skills about SDM and pre-appraised evidence. We designed a half-day workshop, informed by an international consensus on EBP core competencies and invited practicing clinicians to participate. Skills in SDM and communicating evidence were assessed by audio-recording consultations between clinicians and standardised patients (immediately pre-workshop and post-workshop). These were rated by two independent assessors using the OPTION (Observing Patient Involvement, 0 to 100 points) and ACEPP (Assessing Communication about Evidence and Patient Preferences, 0 to 5 points) tools. Participants also completed a feedback questionnaire (9 Likert scale and four open-ended questions). Fourteen clinicians participated. Skills in SDM and communicating research evidence improved from pre-workshop to post-workshop (mean increase in OPTION score=5.5, 95% CI 1.0 to 9.9; increase in ACEPP score=0.5, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.06). Participant feedback was positive, with most indicating ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ to the questions. A contemporary approach to teaching clinicians EBP, with a focus on SDM and pre-appraised evidence, was feasible, perceived as useful, and showed modest improvements in skills. Results should be interpreted cautiously because of the small study size and pre-post design.

scholarly journals Development of a Draft Core Set of Domains for Measuring Shared Decision Making in Osteoarthritis: An OMERACT Working Group on Shared Decision Making

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (12) ◽  
pp. 2442-2447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karine Toupin-April ◽  
Jennifer Barton ◽  
Liana Fraenkel ◽  
Linda Li ◽  
Viviane Grandpierre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Group Process ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Nominal Group ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Core Set ◽  
Group 2

Objective.Despite the importance of shared decision making for delivering patient-centered care in rheumatology, there is no consensus on how to measure its process and outcomes. The aim of this Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) working group is to determine the core set of domains for measuring shared decision making in intervention studies in adults with osteoarthritis (OA), from the perspectives of patients, health professionals, and researchers.Methods.We followed the OMERACT Filter 2.0 method to develop a draft core domain set by (1) forming an OMERACT working group; (2) conducting a review of domains of shared decision making; and (3) obtaining opinions of all those involved using a modified nominal group process held at a session activity at the OMERACT 12 meeting.Results.In all, 26 people from Europe, North America, and Australia, including 5 patient research partners, participated in the session activity. Participants identified the following domains for measuring shared decision making to be included as part of the draft core set: (1) identifying the decision, (2) exchanging information, (3) clarifying views, (4) deliberating, (5) making the decision, (6) putting the decision into practice, and (7) assessing the effect of the decision. Contextual factors were also suggested.Conclusion.We proposed a draft core set of shared decision-making domains for OA intervention research studies. Next steps include a workshop at OMERACT 13 to reach consensus on these proposed domains in the wider OMERACT group, as well as to detail subdomains and assess instruments to develop a core outcome measurement set.

The Development and Evaluation of Personalized Training in Shared Decision-making Skills for Rheumatologists

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 290-297
Author(s):  
Sehrash Mahmood ◽  
Johanna M.W. Hazes ◽  
Petra Veldt ◽  
Piet van Riel ◽  
Robert Landewé ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Training Program ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Communication Skills ◽  
Training Programs ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Communicative Skills ◽  
Patients Satisfaction ◽  
Before And After

Objective.Many factors influence a patient’s preference in engaging in shared decision making (SDM). Several training programs have been developed for teaching SDM to physicians, but none of them focused on the patients’ preferences. We developed an SDM training program for rheumatologists with a specific focus on patients’ preferences and assessed its effects.Methods.A training program was developed, pilot tested, and given to 30 rheumatologists. Immediately after the training and 10 weeks later, rheumatologists were asked to complete a questionnaire to evaluate the training. Patients were asked before and after the training to complete a questionnaire on patient satisfaction.Results.Ten weeks after the training, 57% of the rheumatologists felt they were capable of estimating the need of patients to engage in SDM, 62% felt their communication skills had improved, and 33% reported they engaged more in SDM. Up to 268 patients were included. Overall, patient satisfaction was high, but there were no statistically significant differences in patient satisfaction before and after the training.Conclusion.The training was received well by the participating rheumatologists. Even in a population of rheumatologists that communicates well, 62% reported improvement. The training program increased awareness about the principles of SDM in patients and physicians, and improved physicians’ communicative skills, but did not lead to further improvement in patients’ satisfaction, which was already high.

The Role of Shared Decision-Making in Audiologic Rehabilitation

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Pryce ◽  
Amanda Hall
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Behavior Changes ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Treatment Information ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Potential Risks ◽  
Audiologic Rehabilitation

Shared decision-making (SDM), a component of patient-centered care, is the process in which the clinician and patient both participate in decision-making about treatment; information is shared between the parties and both agree with the decision. Shared decision-making is appropriate for health care conditions in which there is more than one evidence-based treatment or management option that have different benefits and risks. The patient's involvement ensures that the decisions regarding treatment are sensitive to the patient's values and preferences. Audiologic rehabilitation requires substantial behavior changes on the part of patients and includes benefits to their communication as well as compromises and potential risks. This article identifies the importance of shared decision-making in audiologic rehabilitation and the changes required to implement it effectively.

On the evaluation of shared decision making: The Decision Evaluation Scales

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. F. M. Stalmeier ◽  
M. S. Roosmalen ◽  
L. C. G. Josette Verhoef ◽  
E. H. M. Hoekstra-Weebers ◽  
J. C. Oosterwijk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision

Shared Decision Making to Increase Family Involvement in the Care of Consumers With SMI

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirley M. Glynn ◽  
Lisa Dixon ◽  
Amy Cohen ◽  
Amy Drapalski ◽  
Deborah Medoff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Family Involvement ◽  
Shared Decision
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document