Using a Shared Decision Making Tool to Clarify Patient Preference for Treatment Options of Menopausal Symptoms [21M]

2019 ◽  
Vol 133 (1) ◽  
pp. 146S-146S
Author(s):  
Sandra Dayaratna ◽  
Rhea Powell ◽  
Rebecca Gould ◽  
Randa Sifri ◽  
Katherine Sherif ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Patient Preference ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Menopausal Symptoms ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Decision Making Tool

scholarly journals A Case Report of College Students’ Rating of a Shared Decision-Making Tool for Taking Antidepression Medication

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 237437352110073
Author(s):  
Janet Reis
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Medium Size ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Interactive Decision Making ◽  
Prevalence Of Depression ◽  
College Population ◽  
Pros And Cons ◽  
Decision Making Tool

Forty-nine students enrolled at a medium size public university volunteered to review an interactive decision-making tool constructed to present the pros and cons of taking antidepression medication. The tool is built according to guidelines for shared decision-making with 7 educational sections followed by 4 queries on expectations about antidepressants, 3 key knowledge questions, and determination of readiness to take action. The most frequently cited reason for the content being helpful was improved understanding (78%) followed by increased personal confidence (37%) and helped me take action (14%). The most frequently cited reason for the content not being more helpful was already known information (74%) followed by not enough information (12%). The range of personal preferences underscores the complexity of motivations in responding to depressive symptoms. The prevalence of depression in the college population with a range of treatment options, limitations on resources, and new challenges mounted with the pandemic for campus life recommends further study of such tools.

Development of a shared decision‐making tool in vitiligo: an international study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Shourick ◽  
M. Ahmed ◽  
J. Seneschal ◽  
T. Passeron ◽  
N. Andreux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
International Study ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Decision Making Tool

scholarly journals Patient decision aid based on multi-criteria decision analysis for disease-modifying drugs for multiple sclerosis: prototype development

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I. E. H. Kremer ◽  
P. J. Jongen ◽  
S. M. A. A. Evers ◽  
E. L. J. Hoogervorst ◽  
W. I. M. Verhagen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Disease Modifying Drugs ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Further Development

Abstract Background Since decision making about treatment with disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) for multiple sclerosis (MS) is preference sensitive, shared decision making between patient and healthcare professional should take place. Patient decision aids could support this shared decision making process by providing information about the disease and the treatment options, to elicit the patient’s preference and to support patients and healthcare professionals in discussing these preferences and matching them with a treatment. Therefore, a prototype of a patient decision aid for MS patients in the Netherlands—based on the principles of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) —was developed, following the recommendations of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. MCDA was chosen as it might reduce cognitive burden of considering treatment options and matching patient preferences with the treatment options. Results After determining the scope to include DMDs labelled for relapsing-remitting MS and clinically isolated syndrome, users’ informational needs were assessed using focus groups (N = 19 patients) and best-worst scaling surveys with patients (N = 185), neurologists and nurses (N = 60) to determine which information about DMDs should be included in the patient decision aid. Next, an online format and computer-based delivery of the patient decision aid was chosen to enable embedding of MCDA. A literature review was conducting to collect evidence on the effectiveness and burden of use of the DMDs. A prototype was developed next, and alpha testing to evaluate its comprehensibility and usability with in total thirteen patients and four healthcare professionals identified several issues regarding content and framing, methods for weighting importance of criteria in the MCDA structure, and the presentation of the conclusions of the patient decision aid ranking the treatment options according to the patient’s preferences. Adaptations were made accordingly, but verification of the rankings provided, validation of the patient decision aid, evaluation of the feasibility of implementation and assessing its value for supporting shared decision making should be addressed in further development of the patient decision aid. Conclusion This paper aimed to provide more transparency regarding the developmental process of an MCDA-based patient decision aid for treatment decisions for MS and the challenges faced during this process. Issues identified in the prototype were resolved as much as possible, though some issues remain. Further development is needed to overcome these issues before beta pilot testing with patients and healthcare professionals at the point of clinical decision-making can take place to ultimately enable making conclusions about the value of the MCDA-based patient decision aid for MS patients, healthcare professionals and the quality of care.

Shared Decision Making

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Apurupa Ballamudi ◽  
John Chi
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Risks And Benefits ◽  
Benefit Patient ◽  
Risk And Benefit

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a process in which patients and providers work together to make medical decisions with a patient-centric focus, considering available evidence, treatment options, the patient’s values and goals, and risks and benefits. It is important for all providers to understand how to effectively use SDM in their interactions with patients to improve patients’ experiences throughout their healthcare journey. There are strategies to improve communication between patients and their providers, particularly when communicating quantitative data, risks and benefits, and treatment options. Decision aids (DAs) can help patients understand complex medical information and make an informed decision. This review contains 9 figures, 4 tables and 45 references Key words: Shared decision-making, decision-making, communication, risk and benefit, patient-centered, health literacy, quality of life, decision aids, option grid, pictographs.

scholarly journals An Exploratory Pilot Study to Describe Shared Decision-Making for PTSD Treatment Planning: The Provider Perspective

2019 ◽  
Vol 184 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 467-475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bella Etingen ◽  
Jennifer N Hill ◽  
Laura J Miller ◽  
Alan Schwartz ◽  
Sherri L LaVela ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Post Traumatic Stress ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Treatment Readiness ◽  
Ptsd Treatment

Abstract Objective To describe current practices used by Veterans Administration (VA) mental health (MH) providers involved in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment planning to support engagement of veterans with PTSD in shared decision-making (SDM). Methods Semi-structured interviews with MH providers (n = 9) were conducted at 1 large VA, audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analyzed deductively, guided by a published account of the integral SDM components for MH care. Results While discussing forming a cohesive team with patients, providers noted the importance of establishing rapport and assessing treatment readiness. Providers’ clinical knowledge/expertise, knowledge of the facility’s treatment options, knowledge of how to navigate the VA MH care system, and patient factors (goals/preferences, factors influencing treatment engagement) were noted as important to consider when patients and providers exchange information. When negotiating the treatment plan, providers indicated that conversations should include treatment recommendations and concurrent opportunities for personalization. They also emphasized the importance of discussions to finalize a mutually agreeable patient- and provider-informed treatment plan and measure treatment impact. Conclusion These results offer a preliminary understanding of VA MH providers’ facilitation of SDM for PTSD care. Findings may provide insights for MH providers who wish to engage patients with PTSD in SDM.

Development and acceptability of a shared decision-making tool for commercial peanut allergy therapies

2020 ◽  
Vol 125 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Greenhawt ◽  
Marcus Shaker ◽  
Tonya Winders ◽  
Don A. Bukstein ◽  
Ray S. Davis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Peanut Allergy ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Decision Making Tool
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document