scholarly journals Shared Decision Making in Health Care: Theoretical Perspectives for Why It Works and For Whom

2021 ◽  
pp. 0272989X2110580
Author(s):  
Ken Resnicow ◽  
Delwyn Catley ◽  
Kathy Goggin ◽  
Sarah Hawley ◽  
Geoffrey C. Williams

Applying both theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence, we address 2 key questions regarding shared decision making (SDM): 1) When should SDM be more patient driven, and when should it be more provider driven? and 2) Should health care providers match their SDM style/strategy to patient needs and preferences? Self-determination theory, for example, posits a distinction between autonomy and independence. A patient may autonomously seek their health care provider’s input and guidance, perhaps due to low perceived competence, low coping resources, or high emotional arousal. Given their need state, they may autonomously require nonindependence. In this case, it may be more patient centered and need supportive to provide more provider-driven care. We discuss how other patient characteristics such as personality attributes, motivational state, and the course of illness and other parameters such as time available for an encounter may inform optimal provider decision-making style and strategy. We conclude that for some types of patients and clinical circumstances, a more provider-driven approach to decision making may be more practical, ethical, and efficacious. Thus, while all decision making should be patient centered (i.e., it should consider patient needs and preferences), it does not always have to be patient driven. We propose a flexible model of SDM whereby practitioners are encouraged to tailor their decision making behaviors to patient needs, preferences, and other attributes. Studies are needed to test whether matching decision-making behavior based on patient states and traits (i.e., achieving concordance) is more effective than simply providing all patients with the same type of decision making, which could be tested using matching/mismatching designs.

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-127
Author(s):  
Meera Patrawala ◽  
Gerald Lee ◽  
Brian Vickery

Historically, the role of the health-care provider in medical practice has been primarily paternalistic by offering information, compassion, and decisive views with regard to medical decisions. This approach would exclude patients in the decision-making process. In a shift toward more patient-centered care, health-care providers are routinely encouraged to practice shared decision making (SDM). SDM uses evidence-based information about the options, elicitation of patient preferences, and decision support based on the patient’s needs with the use of decision aids or counseling. Although there are well-known benefits of SDM, including improvements in psychological, clinical, and health-care system domains providers have found it challenging to apply SDM in everyday clinical practice. In allergy, we have a unique role in the treatment of children and adults, and SDM should be applied appropriately when engaging with these specific groups. There are many situations in which there is not a clear best option (food allergy testing, food introduction and challenges, and immunotherapy). Therefore, decision aids specific to our field, coupled with evidenced-based information that ultimately leads to a decision that reflects the patient’s values will make for a vital skill in practice. In this article, we defined SDM, the benefits and barriers to SDM, unique situations in SDM, and approach to SDM in food allergy.


2018 ◽  
Vol 159 (5) ◽  
pp. 809-810
Author(s):  
John J. Chi

Decisions about medical and surgical treatment can be complex—even for health care providers, who can struggle with which treatment option to offer their patients. In the current landscape of patient-centric value-based health care, the need for appropriate medical decision making to maximize treatment outcomes is evermore important. Shared decision making is a process in which clinicians and patients make decisions together using the best available evidence while accounting for the patients’ values and beliefs. A patient-centered approach has been associated with improved patient satisfaction, clinical outcomes, and patient adherence to treatment. Only by taking a collaborative care approach among patients, physicians, and caregivers can we hope to deliver the best possible care and improve our outcomes for each and every patient.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oswald Vedasto ◽  
Baraka Morris ◽  
Francis Fredrick Furia

Abstract Background Patients’ participation in decision making regarding their treatment play an important role in treatment outcome through improvement in self-care and adherence to treatment. There is scarcity of information regarding shared decision making in sub-Saharan Africa. This study was conducted to assess participation of patients and health care providers in decision-making process in the diabetic clinic at Muhimbili National Hospital, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.Methods This study employed a phenomenological study design using in-depth interview technique. Study participants were diabetic patients visiting the clinic and healthcare providers working in the diabetic clinic at Muhimbili National Hospital. Data was collected using interview guide with open ended questions using an audio digital recorder. Content analysis method was used during analysis whereby categories were reached through the process of coding with assistance by Nvivo 12 software. Results Several themes were identified in this study including some form of participation in decision making of patients, use of decision aids in the clinic and belief and values regarding patients’ engagement in decision making. Several factors were identified as barriers to shared decision making as noted from participants interview, these included lack of time, literacy level, beliefs and values. Decision aids were reported to be important for improving patient’s knowledge and subsequently their involvement in decisions that were made although it was also noted that these were not prepared by the health care providers in the clinic and they were not adequately provided.Conclusion Some form of participation in decision making was observed in the diabetic clinic at Muhimbili national Hospital, and barriers identified for shared decision-making included time, literacy, beliefs and values.


Author(s):  
Tonya Winders ◽  
Lawrence DuBuske ◽  
Don A. Bukstein ◽  
Eli O. Meltzer ◽  
Dana Wallace ◽  
...  

Background: Most U.S. patient and health care provider surveys with regard to nasal allergy treatments were conducted before sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT)-tablets and allergy immunotherapy (AIT) shared decision-making tools were available.Objective: Patient and health care provider surveys with regard to current perceptions of nasal allergy burden, symptoms, and treatments were conducted to compare with previous surveys and provide insight into the use of SLIT-tablets and AIT shared decision-making tools.Methods: From November-December 2019, adults (N = 510) diagnosed with nasal allergies and health care providers (N = 304) who treated nasal allergies in the United States completed surveys with regard to nasal allergy management.Results: Of the patient respondents, 42% reported that their symptoms were only somewhat controlled and 48% had avoided activities because of their nasal allergies. In all, 38% were using only over-the-counter (OTC) medications for treatment, and 42%, 7%, and 8% had ever received subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), sublingual allergy drops, or SLIT-tablets, respectively; 56% and 85% reported that they had never discussed SCIT or SLIT, respectively, with their health care provider. Of the health care provider respondents, 45%, 58%, and 20% were very likely to discuss OTC medications, SCIT, or SLIT, respectively. Allergists were more inclined to discuss SCIT with their patients than other health care providers (82% versus 33%, respectively). Most allergists (67%) and other health care providers (62%) reported that they did not use an AIT shared decision-making tool, primarily because of unawareness.Conclusion: The patients with nasal allergies continued to report inadequate symptom control and activity impairment.SLIT-tablets and AIT shared decision-making tools were underused. In the coronavirus disease 2019 era, social distancing may limit office visits, which impacts SCIT administration and prompts increased use of telemedicine and a possible advantage for at-home–administered SLIT-tablets over SCIT.


2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 931-947
Author(s):  
Somphit Chinkam ◽  
Kathryn Mezwa ◽  
Kimberly Ashley Pierre ◽  
Courtney Steer-Massaro ◽  
Ivan Herbey ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Osward Vedasto ◽  
Baraka Morris ◽  
Francis Fredrick Furia

Abstract Background Patients’ participation in decision making regarding their treatment is defined in ethical, legal and human rights standards in the provision of care that concerns health providers and the entire community. This study was conducted to document experiences of patients and health care providers on shared decision making. Methods:This study employed a phenomenological study design using in-depth interview technique. Study participants were diabetic patients visiting the clinic and healthcare providers working at Muhimbili National Hospital. Data was collected using the semi-structured interview guide with open-ended questions using an audio digital recorder. Content analysis method was used during analysis whereby categories were reached through the process of coding assisted by Nvivo 12 software. Results Participants in this study expressed the role of shared decision-making in the care of patients with diabetes, with report of engagement of patients by health care providers in making treatment decisions. Participants reported no use of decision-making aids; however, health education tools were reported by participants to be used for educating patients. Limited time, patient beliefs and literacy were documented as barriers of effective engagement of patients in decision making by their healthcare providers. Conclusion Engagement of patients in decision-making was noted in this study as experienced by participants of this study. Time, patient beliefs and patient literacy were documented as barriers for patients engagement, therefore diabetic clinic at Muhimbili National Hospital need to devise mechanisms for ensuring patients involvement in treatment decisions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document