scholarly journals Learning shared decision-making in clinical practice

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anke J.M. Oerlemans ◽  
Marjan L. Knippenberg ◽  
Gert J. Olthuis
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision

scholarly journals A descriptive model of shared decision making derived from routine implementation in clinical practice (‘Implement-SDM’): Qualitative study

2019 ◽  
Vol 102 (10) ◽  
pp. 1774-1785 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie Joseph-Williams ◽  
Denitza Williams ◽  
Fiona Wood ◽  
Amy Lloyd ◽  
Katherine Brain ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Descriptive Model

scholarly journals Dissemination and Implementation of Shared Decision Making Into Clinical Practice: A Research Agenda

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (12) ◽  
pp. 1368-1379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hemal K. Kanzaria ◽  
Juanita Booker-Vaughns ◽  
Kaoru Itakura ◽  
Kabir Yadav ◽  
Bryan G. Kane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Dissemination And Implementation ◽  
Shared Decision

Engaging older people in decisions about their healthcare: the case for shared decision making

2012 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Lally ◽  
Ellen Tullo
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Healthcare Professional ◽  
Older People ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Condition ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Risks And Benefits

SummaryShared decision making in clinical practice involves both the healthcare professional, an expert in the clinical condition and the patient who is an expert in what is important to them. A consultation involving shared decision making enables an examination of the options available, consideration of the risks and benefits whilst incorporating the values of the patient into the decision making process. A decision is aimed at, which is both clinically appropriate and is congruent with the patient's values.Older people have been shown to value involvement, to varying degrees, in decisions about their care and treatment. The case of atrial fibrillation shows the opportunities for, and benefits of, sharing with older people decision making about their healthcare.

scholarly journals Evaluation of a National Programme to Enhance Shared Decision-Making Skills among Junior Medical Doctors in Denmark: A Mixed Methods Study of Satisfaction, Usefulness, and Dissemination of Learning Outcomes in Clinical Practice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Helene Jacobsen ◽  
Cecilie Sommer ◽  
Siw Anna Wernberg ◽  
Helga Schultz ◽  
Sofie Charlotte Fage Hjortø ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Training Programme ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Junior Doctors ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Medical Doctors

Abstract Background Shared Decision-Making (SDM) is a cornerstone in patient-centred care and there is an increase in programmes aiming to enhance clinicians’ abilities to engage in SDM. However, the evidence of such programmes’ effectiveness on clinicians’ use of SDM in clinical practice is sparse. The SDM Ambassador course, developed and facilitated by the Danish Association of Junior Doctors in Denmark (Junior Doctors Denmark) is a Danish SDM training programme for junior medical doctors (JMDs). This study aims to evaluate the SDM Ambassador course, with a focus satisfaction, usefulness, and dissemination of learning outcomes in clinical practice. Methods This study is a mixed methods study consisting of an online survey followed by semi-structured interviews. The participants of this study were JMDs who had trained to be SDM ambassadors between May 2016 and September 2020 (n=185). The ambassadors were invited to participate in the survey and 112 ambassadors completed the survey, corresponding to a response rate of 61%. Descriptive statistics and χ2-tests were conducted. Subsequently, purposive sampling was used to identify 10 ambassadors for interviews. The interviews were transcribed, encoded and subsequently analysed thematically. Finally, the quantitative and qualitative results were integrated. Results Overall, the ambassadors were satisfied with their learning outcomes and experienced a greater capacity to unfold the perspectives of their patients. A majority (79%) reported that they had used SDM in their clinical practice with patients, and 59% had disseminated SDM to their colleagues. The usefulness and dissemination of learning outcomes in the clinic were shaped by the ambassadors’ perceptions of their moderate professional experience, and constrained by structural and cultural conditions in the context of their clinical practice. Conclusion Despite overall satisfaction with their learning outcomes, several ambassadors experienced conditions constraining the translation of their learning outcomes into clinical practice. To improve the efficacy of the training programme, continuous refresher courses should be added while enhanced support at organisational and political levels is necessary for SDM to become an integral feature of the clinical encounter. Trial registration: Not applicable.

scholarly journals Shared Decision Making

2021 ◽  
Vol 02 (01) ◽  
pp. 111-117
Author(s):  
Wei Wang
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Emergency Management ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Significant Potential

Shared decision making (SDM) is a process by which physicians and patients jointly participate in choosing to pursue one of several alternatives in a clinical decision. It is most relevant for decisions that involve significant potential harms and benefits with tradeoffs and uncertainty. This paper provides a state-of-the-art review about SDM covering its concept, value, implementation and application in emergency management and communication. SDM is valuable in the process of making decisions which patients may benefit most from, thus resulting in satisfying patient-centered outcomes. Although SDM can be challenging to incorporate into clinical practice, it is likely to become a useful tool of communication in future.

scholarly journals Exploring healthcare professionals’ knowledge, attitudes and experiences of shared decision making in rheumatology

RMD Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e001121
Author(s):  
Elke G E Mathijssen ◽  
Bart J F van den Bemt ◽  
Sabien Wielsma ◽  
Frank H J van den Hoogen ◽  
Johanna E Vriezekolk
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Active Role ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Exact Test

ObjectivesTo explore physicians’ and nurses’ knowledge, attitudes and experiences of shared decision making (SDM) in rheumatology, to identify barriers and facilitators to SDM, and to examine whether physicians’ and nurses’ perspectives of SDM differ.MethodsA cross-sectional, exploratory, online survey was used. Besides demographic characteristics, healthcare professionals’ knowledge, attitudes and experiences of SDM in rheumatology were assessed. Barriers and facilitators to SDM were identified from healthcare professionals’ answers. Descriptive statistics were computed and differences between physicians’ and nurses’ perspectives of SDM were examined with a t-test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate.ResultsBetween April and June 2019, 77 physicians and 70 nurses completed the survey. Although most healthcare professionals lacked a full conceptual understanding of SDM, almost all physicians (92%) and all nurses had a (very) positive attitude toward SDM, which was most frequently motivated by the belief that SDM improves patients’ treatment adherence. The majority (>50%) of healthcare professionals experienced problems with the application of SDM in clinical practice, mostly related to time constraints. Other important barriers were the incompatibility of SDM with clinical practice guidelines and beliefs that patients do not prefer to be involved in decision making or are not able to take an active role. Modest differences between physicians’ and nurses’ perspectives of SDM were found.ConclusionsThere is a clear need for education and training that equips and empowers healthcare professionals to apply SDM. Furthermore, the commitment of time, resources and financial support for national, regional and organisational initiatives is needed to make SDM in rheumatology a practical reality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document