Shared decision making and consent post-Montgomery, UK Supreme Court judgement supporting best practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 103 (12) ◽  
pp. 2609-2612
Author(s):  
Joel Ward ◽  
Dilraj Kalsi ◽  
Anirudh Chandrashekar ◽  
Bill Fulford ◽  
Regent Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Uk Supreme Court

scholarly journals Montgomery and shared decision-making: implications for good psychiatric practice

2018 ◽  
Vol 213 (5) ◽  
pp. 630-632 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gwen Adshead ◽  
David Crepaz-Keay ◽  
Mayura Deshpande ◽  
K.W.M (Bill) Fulford ◽  
Veryan Richards
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Treatment ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Psychiatric Care ◽  
Psychiatric Practice ◽  
Health Board ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Consent To Medical Treatment

SummaryThe 2015 Supreme Court judgment in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11 established that consent to medical treatment requires shared decision-making based on dialogue between the clinician and patient. In this editorial, we examine what Montgomery means for standards of good psychiatric practice, and argue that it represents an opportunity for delivering best practice in psychiatric care.Declaration of interestNone.

scholarly journals Engaging Multidisciplinary Stakeholders to Drive Shared Decision-Making in Oncology

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabrielle Rocque ◽  
Ellen Miller-Sonnet ◽  
Alan Balch ◽  
Carrie Stricker ◽  
Josh Seidman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Oncology Practice ◽  
Development And Validation

Although recognized as best practice, regular integration of shared decision-making (SDM) approaches between patients and oncologists remains an elusive goal. It is clear that usable, feasible, and practical tools are needed to drive increased SDM in oncology. To address this goal, we convened a multidisciplinary collaborative inclusive of experts across the health-care delivery ecosystem to identify key principles in designing and testing processes to promote SDM in routine oncology practice. In this commentary, we describe 3 best practices for addressing challenges associated with implementing SDM that emerged from a multidisciplinary collaborative: (1) engagement of diverse stakeholders who have interest in SDM, (2) development and validation of an evidence-based SDM tool grounded within an established conceptual framework, and (3) development of the necessary roadmap and consideration of the infrastructure needed for engendering patient engagement in decision-making. We believe these 3 principles are critical to the success of creating SDM tools to be utilized both within and outside of clinical practice. We are optimistic that shared use across settings will support adoption of this tool and overcome barriers to implementing SDM within busy clinical workflows. Ultimately, we hope that this work will offer new perspectives on what is important to patients and provide an important impetus for leveraging patient preferences and values in decision-making.

A Shared Decision-Making Model for Management of Small Renal Masses: Optimizing the Patient Experience

Kidney Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 169-176
Author(s):  
Adele Marie Caruso ◽  
K. Michelle Ardisson ◽  
Roshan Ravishankar ◽  
S. Bruce Malkowicz
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Educational Attainment ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Renal Mass ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Renal Masses

Background: The finding of a small renal mass (SRM) on radiological imaging and the potential of a cancer diagnosis is anxiety provoking in most patients. The decision-making process often occurs in the absence of any framework regarding the nature and treatment outcomes. This project aimed to educate patients newly diagnosed with a SRM, implement a shared decision-making (SDM) model, and assess the educational attainment and effect on a SDM intervention. Methods: This project assessed the educational attainment and its effect on a SDM intervention using a pre-and post- intervention survey, an educational video [Urology Care Foundation, “What is a renal mass?], and a structured provider discussion. The survey incorporated eight knowledge questions and two questions which addressed anxiety related to diagnosis and confidence in decision-making. Results: Fifty surveys were completed. The post intervention score showed a significant increase in patient knowledge. Wilcoxon signed rank test (P = <0.001; 2.0; CI 95% (1.54–2.46)). Thirty-nine demonstrated improvement in knowledge with a mean of 2.0, 9 were unchanged and 2 decreased. Approximately 42% of patients reported a decrease in anxiety rating by a mean of 40%. When confidence in decision-making improved, it improved by a mean of 45%. Conclusions: A significant improvement in understanding of SRMs was demonstrated. This model showed improved knowledge, alleviation of anxiety and improved confidence and denotes the feasibility of implementing a SDM model in newly diagnosed patients. Results should encourage providers who aspire to incorporate a SDM as a Best Practice.

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