Theory-Informed Design Guidelines for Shared Decision Making Tools for Health Behaviour Change

2021 ◽  
pp. 259-274
Author(s):  
Cindel Bonneux ◽  
Gustavo Rovelo Ruiz ◽  
Paul Dendale ◽  
Karin Coninx
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Health Behaviour ◽  
Design Guidelines ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Health Behaviour Change

scholarly journals Shared decision-making (SHARE-D) for healthy behaviour change: a feasibility study in general practice

BJGP Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. bjgpopen18X101517
Author(s):  
Margaret E Cupples ◽  
Judith A Cole ◽  
Nigel D Hart ◽  
Neil Heron ◽  
Michelle C McKinley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Feasibility Study ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Decision Tools ◽  
Collaborative Exploration ◽  
Positive Response Rate

BackgroundEffective interventions are needed to support health behaviour change for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. Decision tools encourage behaviour change but their effectiveness when used in shared decision-making with health professionals (HPs) is unknown.AimTo test the feasibility of using a novel, paper-based tool for shared decision-making in initiating behaviour change.Design & settingA feasibility study in five general practices in Northern Ireland.MethodAdults with, or at high risk of, CVD were invited to discuss their diet and physical activity (PA) with an HP. Using a paper-based decision aid in shared decision-making about behaviour change, their capabilities, opportunities, and motivation were considered. Diet and PA were assessed at baseline, 1, and 3 months using the Dietary Instrument for Nutritional Education (DINE) and the Recent Physical Activity Questionnaire (RPAQ); accelerometers measured PA at baseline and 3 months. Semi-structured interviews, analysed thematically, explored participants’ and HPs’ views of the process.ResultsThe positive response rate to study invitation was 28% (45/162); 23 were recruited (aged 43–74 years; 50% male; <40% met diet or PA recommendations); and 87% (20/23) completed the study. All interviewees valued the tool’s structure, succinct content, and facilitation of discussion. HPs’ sharing of relevant personal experience encouraged behaviour change; social responsibilities, health conditions, and beliefs restricted change. HPs’ workloads prohibited the tool’s routine use.ConclusionRecruitment and completion rates suggest that using a novel, paper-based tool in shared decision-making for behaviour change is feasible. HPs’ workloads constrain its use in practice, but qualitative findings indicate its potential value. Cross-sector collaborative exploration of sustainable models to promote behaviour change is needed.

scholarly journals Co-Developing an Antibiotic Stewardship Tool for Dentistry: Shared Decision-Making for Adults with Toothache or Infection

Antibiotics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 1345
Author(s):  
Wendy Thompson ◽  
Jonathan Sandoe ◽  
Sue Pavitt ◽  
Tanya Walsh ◽  
Lucie Byrne-Davis
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Antibiotic Stewardship ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Ethnographic Study ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Think Aloud ◽  
Shared Decision

Dentistry is responsible for around 10% of antibiotic prescribing across global healthcare, with up to 80% representing inappropriate use. Facilitating shared decision-making has been shown to optimise antibiotic prescribing (antibiotic stewardship) in primary medical care. Our aim was to co-develop a shared decision-making antibiotic stewardship tool for dentistry. Dentists, patients and other stakeholders prioritised factors to include in the new tool, based on previous research (a systematic review and ethnographic study) about dentists’ decision-making during urgent appointments. Candidate behaviour-change techniques were identified using the Behaviour Change Wheel and selected based on suitability for a shared decision-making approach. A ‘think aloud’ study helped fine-tune the tool design and Crystal Marking ensured clarity of messaging. The resulting paper-based worksheet for use at point-of-care incorporated various behaviour change techniques, such as: ’information about (and salience of) health consequences’, ‘prompts and cues’, ‘restructuring the physical (and social) environment’ and ‘credible sources’. The think aloud study confirmed the tool’s acceptability to dentists and patients, and resulted in the title: ‘Step-by-step guide to fixing your toothache.’ Further testing will be necessary to evaluate its efficacy at safely reducing dental antibiotic prescribing during urgent dental appointments in England and, with translation, to other dental contexts globally.

scholarly journals A systematic review of shared decision making interventions in child and youth mental health: synthesising the use of theory, intervention functions, and behaviour change techniques

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Hayes ◽  
Julian Edbrooke-Childs ◽  
Rosa Town ◽  
Miranda Wolpert ◽  
Nick Midgley
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Youth Mental Health ◽  
Behaviour Change Techniques ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Specific Intervention ◽  
Inclusion Criteria

AbstractReviews around interventions to improve shared decision making (SDM) for child and youth mental health have produced inconclusive findings on what approaches increase participation. Importantly, the previous reviews did not explore the use of theory, as well as mechanisms of change (intervention functions) and active units of change (behaviour change techniques). The aim of this review was to explore these factors and ascertain how, if at all, these contribute to SDM. Five databases were searched up until April 2020. Studies met inclusion criteria if they were: (a) an intervention to facilitate SDM; (b) aimed at children, adolescence, or young people aged up to 25, with a mental health difficulty, or their parents/guardians; and (c) included a control group. Data were extracted on patient characteristics, study design, intervention, theoretical background, intervention functions, behaviour change techniques, and SDM. Quality assessment of the studies was undertaken using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) quality assessment tool. Eight different interventions met inclusion criteria. The role of theory to increase SDM remains unclear. Specific intervention functions, such as ‘education’ on SDM and treatment options and ‘environmental restructuring’ using decision aids, are being used in SDM interventions, as well as ‘training’ for clinicians. Similarly, behaviour change techniques linked to these, such as ‘adding objects to the environment’, ‘discussing pros/cons’, and clinicians engaging in ‘behavioural practice/rehearsal’. However, as most studies scored low on the quality assessment criteria, as well as a small number of studies included and a low number of behaviour change techniques utilised, links between behaviour change techniques, intervention functions and increased participation remain tentative. Intervention developers and clinicians may wish to consider specific intervention functions and behaviour change techniques to facilitate SDM.

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

Shared-Decision-Making

2018 ◽  
Vol 09 (06) ◽  
pp. 250-252
Author(s):  
Rainer Bubenzer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Partizipative Entscheidungsfindung ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Sich Eine

Auch in der Onkologie hat das Thema Patientenbeteiligung zunehmend an Bedeutung gewonnen. Ein häufig genanntes Mantra dazu lautet: Viele Patienten wünschen sich eine aktivere Rolle bei der eigenen Gesundheitsversorgung, am besten auf „Augenhöhe“. Ein Ansatz, der solche Wünsche berücksichtigt, ist die partizipative Entscheidungsfindung (PEF, shared-decision-making). Auch auf gesundheitspolitischer Ebene spielt PEF eine wachsende Rolle, wird z. B. im Rahmen des Nationalen Krebsplans spezifisch gefördert (►siehe Kasten). Ob und wieweit diese ambitionierten Ziele in der Onkologie in der Versorgungswirklichkeit angekommen sind, war eines der Themen beim 17. Deutschen Kongress für Versorgungsforschung in Berlin. Es zeigte sich: PEF ist in vielen Bereichen der Onkologie noch längst nicht angekommen.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document