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

Thomas H. Wieringa, Rene Rodriguez-Gutierrez, Gabriela Spencer-Bonilla, Maartje De Wit, Oscar J. Ponce, Manuel F. Sanchez-Herrera, Nataly R. Espinoza, Yaara Zisman-Ilani, Marleen Kunneman, Linda J. Schoonmade, Victor M. Montori, Frank J. Snoek

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

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 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. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016050320.

Original languageEnglish
Article number121
JournalSystematic Reviews
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 20 May 2019

Cite this

Wieringa, Thomas H. ; Rodriguez-Gutierrez, Rene ; Spencer-Bonilla, Gabriela ; De Wit, Maartje ; Ponce, Oscar J. ; Sanchez-Herrera, Manuel F. ; Espinoza, Nataly R. ; Zisman-Ilani, Yaara ; Kunneman, Marleen ; Schoonmade, Linda J. ; Montori, Victor M. ; Snoek, Frank J. / Decision aids that facilitate elements of shared decision making in chronic illnesses : A systematic review. In: Systematic Reviews. 2019 ; Vol. 8, No. 1.
@article{295aa56434f142c7a3d82ade5dd34911,
title = "Decision aids that facilitate elements of shared decision making in chronic illnesses: A systematic review",
abstract = "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 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. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016050320.",
keywords = "Chronic illnesses, Decision aids, Shared decision making",
author = "Wieringa, {Thomas H.} and Rene Rodriguez-Gutierrez and Gabriela Spencer-Bonilla and {De Wit}, Maartje and Ponce, {Oscar J.} and Sanchez-Herrera, {Manuel F.} and Espinoza, {Nataly R.} and Yaara Zisman-Ilani and Marleen Kunneman and Schoonmade, {Linda J.} and Montori, {Victor M.} and Snoek, {Frank J.}",
year = "2019",
month = "5",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1186/s13643-019-1034-4",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
journal = "Systematic Reviews",
issn = "2046-4053",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

Wieringa, TH, Rodriguez-Gutierrez, R, Spencer-Bonilla, G, De Wit, M, Ponce, OJ, Sanchez-Herrera, MF, Espinoza, NR, Zisman-Ilani, Y, Kunneman, M, Schoonmade, LJ, Montori, VM & Snoek, FJ 2019, 'Decision aids that facilitate elements of shared decision making in chronic illnesses: A systematic review' Systematic Reviews, vol. 8, no. 1, 121. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1034-4

Decision aids that facilitate elements of shared decision making in chronic illnesses : A systematic review. / Wieringa, Thomas H.; Rodriguez-Gutierrez, Rene; Spencer-Bonilla, Gabriela; De Wit, Maartje; Ponce, Oscar J.; Sanchez-Herrera, Manuel F.; Espinoza, Nataly R.; Zisman-Ilani, Yaara; Kunneman, Marleen; Schoonmade, Linda J.; Montori, Victor M.; Snoek, Frank J.

In: Systematic Reviews, Vol. 8, No. 1, 121, 20.05.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Decision aids that facilitate elements of shared decision making in chronic illnesses

T2 - A systematic review

AU - Wieringa, Thomas H.

AU - Rodriguez-Gutierrez, Rene

AU - Spencer-Bonilla, Gabriela

AU - De Wit, Maartje

AU - Ponce, Oscar J.

AU - Sanchez-Herrera, Manuel F.

AU - Espinoza, Nataly R.

AU - Zisman-Ilani, Yaara

AU - Kunneman, Marleen

AU - Schoonmade, Linda J.

AU - Montori, Victor M.

AU - Snoek, Frank J.

PY - 2019/5/20

Y1 - 2019/5/20

N2 - 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 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. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016050320.

AB - 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 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. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016050320.

KW - Chronic illnesses

KW - Decision aids

KW - Shared decision making

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85066450901&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s13643-019-1034-4

DO - 10.1186/s13643-019-1034-4

M3 - Review article

VL - 8

JO - Systematic Reviews

JF - Systematic Reviews

SN - 2046-4053

IS - 1

M1 - 121

ER -