scholarly journals Shared decision‐making with people with intellectual disabilities in the last phase of life: A scoping review

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (11) ◽  
pp. 881-894
Author(s):  
H. W. Noorlandt ◽  
M. A. Echteld ◽  
I. Tuffrey‐Wijne ◽  
D. A. M. Festen ◽  
C. Vrijmoeth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Intellectual Disabilities ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
People With Intellectual Disabilities

scholarly journals Current Status and Future Prospects for Shared Decision Making before and after Total Knee Replacement Surgery—A Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 668
Author(s):  
Geert van der Sluis ◽  
Jelmer Jager ◽  
Ilona Punt ◽  
Alexandra Goldbohm ◽  
Marjan J. Meinders ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Total Knee Replacement ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Knee Replacement ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Total Knee

Background. To gain insight into the current state-of-the-art of shared decision making (SDM) during decisions related to pre and postoperative care process regarding primary total knee replacement (TKR). Methods. A scoping review was performed to synthesize existing scientific research regarding (1) decisional needs and preferences of patients preparing for, undergoing and recovering from TKR surgery, (2) the relation between TKR decision-support interventions and SDM elements (i.e., team talk, option talk, and decision talk), (3) the extent to which TKR decision-support interventions address patients’ decisional needs and preferences. Results. 2526 articles were identified, of which 17 articles met the inclusion criteria. Of the 17 articles, ten had a qualitative study design and seven had a quantitative study design. All included articles focused on the decision whether to undergo TKR surgery or not. Ten articles (all qualitative) examined patients’ decisional needs and preferences. From these, we identified four domains that affected the patients’ decision to undergo TKR: (1) personal factors, (2) external factors, (3) information sources and (4) preferences towards outcome prediction. Seven studies (5) randomized controlled trials and 2 cohort studies) used quantitative analyses to probe the effect of decision aids on SDM and/or clinical outcomes. In general, existing decision aids did not appear to be tailored to patient needs and preferences, nor were the principles of SDM well-articulated in the design of decision aids. Conclusions. SDM in TKR care is understudied; existing research appears to be narrow in scope with limited relevance to established SDM principles and the decisional needs of patients undertaking TKR surgery.

MORE WORK NEEDED ON DECISION ANALYSIS FOR SHARED DECISION-MAKING: A SCOPING REVIEW

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittany Humphries ◽  
Montserrat León-García ◽  
Ena Niño de Guzman Quispe ◽  
Carlos Canelo-Aybar ◽  
Claudia Valli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Shared Decision

scholarly journals Patient engagement, treatment preferences and shared decision-making in the treatment of opioid use disorder in adults: a scoping review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e022267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyler Marshall ◽  
Elizabeth N Kinnard ◽  
Myles Hancock ◽  
Susanne King-Jones ◽  
Karin Olson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Search Strategy ◽  
Opioid Use Disorder ◽  
Treatment Preferences ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Cochrane Database

IntroductionOpioid use disorder (OUD) is characterised by the fifth Edition of the Diagnostic and Statistics Manual as a problematic pattern of opioid use (eg, fentanyl, heroin, oxycodone) that leads to clinically significant impairment. OUD diagnoses have risen substantially over the last decade, and treatment services have struggled to meet the demand. Evidence suggests when patients with chronic illnesses are matched with their treatment preferences and engaged in shared decision-making (SDM), health outcomes may improve. However, it is not known whether SDM could impact outcomes in specific substance use disorders such as OUD.Methods and analysisA scoping review will be conducted according to Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and by recommendations from Levacet al. The search strategy was developed to retrieve relevant publications from database inception and June 2017. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database for Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews and reference lists of relevant articles and Google Scholar will be searched. Included studies must be composed of adults with a diagnosis of OUD, and investigate SDM or its constituent components. Experimental, quasi-experimental, qualitative, case–control, cohort studies and cross-sectional surveys will be included. Articles will be screened for final eligibility according to title and abstract, and then by full text. Two independent reviewers will screen excluded articles at each stage. A consultation phase with expert clinicians and policy-makers will be added to set the scope of the work, refine research questions, review the search strategy and identify additional relevant literature. Results will summarise whether SDM impacts health and patient-centred outcomes in OUD.Ethics and disseminationScoping review methodology is considered secondary analysis and does not require ethics approval. The final review will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, disseminated at relevant academic conferences and will be shared with policy-makers, patients and clinicians.

scholarly journals Multidisciplinary teams caring for people with variations of sex characteristics: a scoping review

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. e001257
Author(s):  
Martin Gramc ◽  
Jürg Streuli ◽  
Eva de Clercq
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Ethical Principles ◽  
Care Process ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Medical Professionals ◽  
Sex Characteristics ◽  
Multidisciplinary Teams ◽  
Shared Decision

BackgroundIn 2006 the Chicago consensus statement on the management of people with variations of sex characteristics (VSC) acknowledged the importance of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach. The consensus update from 2016 reinforced the call for multidisciplinary collaborations between medical professionals, parents and support groups, and proposed guidelines to improve shared decision making and patient-centred care embedded in ethical principles of self-determination and child participation. But there is little evidence that successfully MDTs have been implemented in clinical practice.Methods and aimsA scoping review was conducted to identify studies that address the collaboration and decision making process of MDTs providing care of people with VSC to identify ideal and actual (1) team composition; (2) models of collaboration and (3) ethical principles that MDTs follow. Six databases were systematically searched: CINAHIL, Medline, Psychinfo, Scopus, Socindex and Web of Science. No restriction was placed on the type of methodology used in the studies. To frame the research, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was used.ResultsThe MDTs in the literature include mainly medical professionals: endocrinologists, urologists and surgeons. The collaboration among medical professionals in MDTs lacks cooperation as one team member sets the tasks of the team while each professional works separately. Despite the importance of psycho-social support the involvement of psychologists remains secondary. The implementation of ethical principles tends to exclude people with VSC.ConclusionThe care of people with VSC described in the papers is medically oriented as the team members are mainly medical professionals working separately. MDT tend to exclude people with VSC despite references to shared decision making processes and informed consent. There was no mention of adult care and lack of inclusion of patient’s perspective in the care process. The future research should do more empirical research of MDTs.

Shared Decision Making in Ophthalmology: A Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Bouaziz ◽  
Tiffany Cheng ◽  
Aurelia Minuti ◽  
Ksenia Denisova ◽  
Anne Barmettler
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Shared Decision

scholarly journals What are the links between evidence-based medicine and shared decision-making in training programs for junior doctors? A scoping review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. e037225
Author(s):  
Mary Simons ◽  
Frances Rapport ◽  
Yvonne Zurynski ◽  
Jeremy Cullis ◽  
Andrew Davidson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Junior Doctors ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Centred Care ◽  
Based Medicine

IntroductionPatient-centred care is pivotal to clinical practice and medical education. The practice of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and shared decision-making (SDM) are complementary aspects of patient-centred care, but they are frequently taught and reported as independent entities. To effectively perform all steps of EBM, clinicians need to include patients in SDM conversations, however, the uptake of this has been slow and inconsistent. A solution may be the incorporation of SDM into EBM training programmes, but such programmes do not routinely include SDM skills development. This scoping review will survey the literature on the kinds of EBM and SDM educational programmes that exist for recently qualified doctors, programmes that incorporate the teaching of both EBM and SDM skills, as well as identifying research gaps in the literature.Methods and analysisLiterature searches will be conducted in the databases Medline, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library. Bibliographies of key articles and their citing references will also be hand-searched and assessed for inclusion. Selected grey literature will be included. Papers must be written in English, or provide English abstracts, and date from 1996 to the present day.Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts, check full texts of selected papers for eligibility and extract the data. Any disagreement will be resolved, and consensus reached, if necessary, with the assistance of a third reviewer. Qualitative and quantitative studies that address educational interventions for either EBM, SDM or both will be included. Data extraction tables will present bibliographic information, populations, interventions, context and outcomes. Data will be summarised using tables and figures and a description of findings.Ethics and disseminationThis review will synthesise information from publicly available publications and does not require ethics approval. The results will be disseminated via conference presentations and publications in medical journals.

scholarly journals Key Elements of Mammography Shared Decision-Making: a Scoping Review of the Literature

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (10) ◽  
pp. 1805-1814 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori L. DuBenske ◽  
Sarina B. Schrager ◽  
Mary E. Hitchcock ◽  
Amanda K. Kane ◽  
Terry A. Little ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Review Of The Literature
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document