Leiden University Scholarly Publications

Persistent URL of this record https://hdl.handle.net/1887/88385

In Collections

This item can be found in the following collections:

Wieringa, T.H.; Rodriguez-Gutierrez, R.; Spencer-Bonilla, G.; Wit, M. de; Ponce, O.J.; Sanchez-Herrera, M.F.; ... ; Snoek, F.J. (2019)

Decision aids that facilitate elements of shared decision making in chronic illnesses: a systematic review

Article / Letter to editor
Background: Shared decision making (SDM) is a patient-centered approach in which clinicians and patients work together to find and choose the best course of action for each patient's particular situation. Six SDM key elements can be identified: situation diagnosis, choice awareness, option clarification, discussion of harms and benefits, deliberation of patient preferences, and making the decision. The International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) require that a decision aid (DA) support these key elements. Yet, the extent to which DAs support these six key SDM elements and how this relates to their impact remain unknown.Methods: We searched bibliographic databases (from inception until November 2017), reference lists of included studies, trial registries, and experts for randomized controlled trials of DAs in patients with cardiovascular, or chronic respiratory conditions or diabetes. Reviewers worked in duplicate and independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted...Show moreBackground: Shared decision making (SDM) is a patient-centered approach in which clinicians and patients work together to find and choose the best course of action for each patient's particular situation. Six SDM key elements can be identified: situation diagnosis, choice awareness, option clarification, discussion of harms and benefits, deliberation of patient preferences, and making the decision. The International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) require that a decision aid (DA) support these key elements. Yet, the extent to which DAs support these six key SDM elements and how this relates to their impact remain unknown.Methods: We searched bibliographic databases (from inception until November 2017), reference lists of included studies, trial registries, and experts for randomized controlled trials of DAs in patients with cardiovascular, or chronic respiratory conditions or diabetes. Reviewers worked in duplicate and independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted trial, and DA characteristics, and evaluated the quality of each trial.Results: DAs most commonly clarified options (20 of 20; 100%) and discussed their harms and benefits (18 of 20; 90%; unclear in two DAs); all six elements were clearly supported in 4 DAs (20%). We found no association between the presence of these elements and SDM outcomes.Conclusions: DAs for selected chronic conditions are mostly designed to transfer information about options and their harms and benefits. The extent to which their support of SDM key elements relates to their impact on SDM outcomes could not be ascertained.Show less
Chronic illnesses
Decision aids
Shared decision making
All authors
Wieringa, T.H.; Rodriguez-Gutierrez, R.; Spencer-Bonilla, G.; Wit, M. de; Ponce, O.J.; Sanchez-Herrera, M.F.; Espinoza, N.R.; Zisman-Ilani, Y.; Kunneman, M.; Schoonmade, L.J.; Montori, V.M.; Snoek, F.J.
Date
2019-05-20
Volume
8
DOI
doi:10.1186/s13643-019-1034-4