Shared decision making for psychiatric medication management: beyond the micro-social

Automation to optimise physician treatment of individual patients: examples in psychiatry

There is widespread agreement by health-care providers, medical associations, industry, and governments that automation using digital technology could improve the delivery and quality of care in psychiatry, and reduce costs. Many benefits from technology have already been realised, along with the identification of many challenges. In this Review, we discuss some of the challenges to developing effective automation for psychiatry to optimise physician treatment of individual patients. Using the perspective of automation experts in other industries, three examples of automation in the delivery of routine care are reviewed: (1) effects of electronic medical records on the patient interview; (2) effects of complex systems integration on e-prescribing; and (3) use of clinical decision support to assist with clinical decision making. An increased understanding of the experience of automation from other sectors might allow for more effective deployment of technology in psychiatry.

[Shared decision-making in acute psychiatric medicine : Contraindication or a challenge?]

BACKGROUND

The concept of shared decision-making (SDM) has existed since the 1990s in multiple fields of somatic medicine but has only been poorly applied in psychiatric clinical routine despite broad acceptance and promising outcomes in clinical studies on its positive effects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The concept itself and its practicability in mental health are carefully assessed and strategies for its future implementation in psychiatric medicine are presented in this article. Ongoing clinical studies probing some of those strategies are further outlined.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

On top of the ubiquitous shortage of time in clinical routine, psychiatrists report their concern about patients' limited abilities in sharing decisions and their own fear of potentially harmful decisions resulting from a shared process. Misinterpretation of shared decision-making restricting the health care professional to rather an informed choice scenario and their own adhesion to the traditional paternalistic decision-making approach further add to SDM's underutilization. Those hurdles could be overcome by communication skill workshops for all mental health care professionals, including nursing personnels, psychologists, social workers and physicians, as well as the use of decision aids and training courses for patients to motivate and empower them in sharing decisions with the medical staff. By this, the patient-centered treatment approach demanded by guidelines, carers and users could be further facilitated in psychiatric clinical routine.

Retrospective Accounts of the Process of Using and Discontinuing Psychiatric Medication

Refusal to take psychiatric medication as prescribed is often considered negative, harmful, and even reflective of a sign of one's illness. However, recent research from diverse sources has challenged this axiom. The current study investigated the reasons, processes, experiences, and perceived impacts of medication discontinuation. The study was carried out using the narrative approach to life stories method. Participants were 12 women and 9 men who had discontinued their prescribed medication following psychiatric hospitalization. Four main themes were revealed in the data analysis: (a) the experience with medication, (b) the process of discontinuing medication, (c) elements that helped achieve successful medication discontinuation, and (d) the perceived impact of medication discontinuation. Our findings challenge the widespread notion that discontinuing psychiatric medication is necessarily negative and suggest that, for some, it is a legitimate and meaningful life choice.

Treatment alliance and adherence in bipolar disorder

The clinician patient relationship lies at the core of psychiatric practice and delivery of mental health care services. The concept of treatment alliance in psychiatry has its origins in psychotherapy, but has also been influenced by several other constructs such as patient-centred care (PCC) and shared decision-making (SDM). Similarly, there has been a shift in conceptualization of treatment-adherence in psychiatric disorders including bipolar disorder (BD) from illness-centred and clinician-centred approaches to patient-centred ones. Moreover, the traditional compliance based models are being replaced by those based on concordance between clinicians and patients. Newer theories of adherence in BD place considerable emphasis on patient related factors and the clinician patient alliance is considered to be one of the principal determinants of treatment-adherence in BD. Likewise, current notions of treatment alliance in BD also stress the importance of equal and collaborative relationships, sensitivity to patients' viewpoints, sharing of knowledge, and mutual responsibility and agreement regarding decisions related to treatment. Accumulated evidence from quantitative research, descriptive accounts, qualitative studies and trials of psychosocial interventions indicates that efficacious treatment alliances have a positive influence on adherence in BD. Then again, research on the alliance-adherence link in BD lags behind the existing literature on the subject in other medical and psychiatric conditions in terms of the size and quality of the evidence, the consistency of its findings and clarity about underlying processes mediating this link. Nevertheless, the elements of an effective alliance which could have a positive impact on adherence in BD are reasonably clear and include PCC, collaborative relationships, SDM, open communication, trust, support, and stability and continuity of the relationship. Therefore, clinicians involved in the care of BD would do well to follow these principles and improve their interpersonal and communication skills in order to build productive alliances with their patients. This could go a long way in confronting the ubiquitous problem of non-adherence in BD. The role of future research in firmly establishing the alliance-adherence connection and uncovering the processes underlying this association will also be vital in devising effective ways to manage non-adherence in BD.

Shared decision making in pharmacotherapy decisions, perceived by patients with bipolar disorder

Background

Shared decision making has been promoted as standard care, but there has been debate on the possible types. On the one hand, there is a more ‘instrumental’/objective approach focused on the exchange of information, but an ‘interpersonal’/subjective patient involvement has been suggested as well. In this study we aim to investigate this further by assessing both actual and perceived patient involvement in medical decisions.

Methods

Eighty-one consultations between patients with bipolar disorder and their clinicians were observed and scored using the OPTION scale. Afterwards, the patients’ experienced involvement was explored with the SDM-Q-9. Furthermore, several patient characteristics were gathered. Correlations between the scores were examined.

Results

The clinicians scored on average 34.6 points on the OPTION scale. In contrast, patients scored on average 77.5 points on the SDM-Q-9, suggesting that patients felt more involved in the consultation than was observable.

Conclusion

Our patients with bipolar disorder feel involved in pharmacotherapy decisions, but this is not scored in objective observations. Our data suggest that there are implicit, interpersonal aspects of patient involvement in shared decision making, a concept that deserves further attention and conceptualisation.

Physician and Pharmacist Medication Decision-Making in the Time of Electronic Health Records: Mixed-Methods Study

Background

Primary care needs to be patient-centered, integrated, and interprofessional to help patients with complex needs manage the burden of medication-related problems. Considering the growing problem of polypharmacy, increasing attention has been paid to how and when medication-related decisions should be coordinated across multidisciplinary care teams. Improved knowledge on how integrated electronic health records (EHRs) can support interprofessional shared decision-making for medication therapy management is necessary to continue improving patient care.

Objective

The objective of our study was to examine how physicians and pharmacists understand and communicate patient-focused medication information with each other and how this knowledge can influence the design of EHRs.

Methods

This study is part of a broader cross-Canada study between patients and health care providers around how medication-related decisions are made and communicated. We visited community pharmacies, team-based primary care clinics, and independent-practice family physician clinics throughout Ontario, Nova Scotia, Alberta, and Quebec. Research assistants conducted semistructured interviews with physicians and pharmacists. A modified version of the Multidisciplinary Framework Method was used to analyze the data.

Results

We collected data from 19 pharmacies and 9 medical clinics and identified 6 main themes from 34 health care professionals. First, Interprofessional Shared Decision-Making was not occurring and clinicians made decisions based on their understanding of the patient. Physicians and pharmacists reported indirect Communication, incomplete Information specifically missing insight into indication and adherence, and misaligned Processes of Care that were further compounded by EHRs that are not designed to facilitate collaboration. Scope of Practice examined professional and workplace boundaries for pharmacists and physicians that were internally and externally imposed. Physicians decided on the degree of the Physician-Pharmacist Relationship, often predicated by colocation.

Conclusions

We observed limited communication and collaboration between primary care providers and pharmacists when managing medications. Pharmacists were missing key information around reason for use, and physicians required accurate information around adherence. EHRs are a potential tool to help clinicians communicate information to resolve this issue. EHRs need to be designed to facilitate interprofessional medication management so that pharmacists and physicians can move beyond task-based work toward a collaborative approach.

Psychiatric service staff perceptions of implementing a shared decision-making tool: a process evaluation study

PURPOSE

Shared decision making, SDM, in psychiatric services, supports users to experience a greater sense of involvement in treatment, self-efficacy, autonomy and reduced coercion. Decision tools adapted to the needs of users have the potential to support SDM and restructure how users and staff work together to arrive at shared decisions. The aim of this study was to describe and analyse the implementation process of an SDM intervention for users of psychiatric services in Sweden.

METHOD

The implementation was studied through a process evaluation utilizing both quantitative and qualitative methods. In designing the process evaluation for the intervention, three evaluation components were emphasized: contextual factors, implementation issues and mechanisms of impact.

RESULTS

The study addresses critical implementation issues related to decision-making authority, the perceived decision-making ability of users and the readiness of the service to increase influence and participation. It also emphasizes the importance of facilitation, as well as suggesting contextual adaptations that may be relevant for the local organizations.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that staff perceived the decision support tool as user-friendly and useful in supporting participation in decision-making, and suggest that such concrete supports to participation can be a factor in implementation if adequate attention is paid to organizational contexts and structures.

Experiences, attitudes, and perceptions of caregivers of individuals with treatment-resistant schizophrenia: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) affects about one-third of individuals with schizophrenia. People with TRS do not experience sustained symptom relief and at the same time have the most severe disease-related disability and associated costs among individuals with severe mental disorders. Like caregivers of people with treatment-responsive schizophrenia, caregivers of individuals with TRS experience the disease burden along with their care recipients; however, for those providing care for individuals with TRS, the stress of the burden is unrelenting due to uncontrolled symptoms and a lack of effective treatment options. The objective of this study is to better understand the burden of TRS from the caregiver perspective and to explore their perception of available treatments.

METHODS

Eight focus groups with non-professional, informal caregivers of individuals with TRS were conducted in 5 US locations. TRS was defined as failure of ≥2 antipsychotics and persistent moderate-to-severe positive symptoms of schizophrenia, per caregiver report.

RESULTS

The 27 caregivers reported an average of 37 h/week providing direct care, and 21 reported being on call "24/7." Caregivers commonly reported that their care recipients exhibited symptoms of auditory hallucinations (89%), agitation/irritability/hostility (81%), suspiciousness (78%), tangentiality (74%), and cognitive impairment (74%); 70% of caregivers ranked suspiciousness/persecution as the most challenging symptom category. Caring for an individual with TRS impacted many caregivers' finances, career prospects, social relationships, and sense of freedom. Additionally, multiple medication failures led to a sense of hopelessness for many caregivers.

CONCLUSIONS

Persistent positive symptoms caused significant perceived burden, feelings of being overwhelmed and having no relief, and substantial negative impacts on caregivers' emotional and physical health. To address these substantial unmet needs, policy makers should be aware of the need for practical, social, and emotional support for these caregivers and their families. Additionally, new treatment options for TRS should be developed.

Development and pilot of a decision-aid for patients with bipolar II disorder and their families making decisions about treatment options to prevent relapse

Introduction

Treatment decisions in bipolar II disorder (BPII) are finely-balanced and sensitive to patient preferences. This pilot study evaluated a decision-aid booklet (DA) for patients with BPII (and their family) to obtain evidence on its acceptability, feasibility, safety, and usefulness in potential end-users.

Methods

The DA booklet was developed according to International Patient Decision-Aid Standards. Thirty-one patients diagnosed with BPII and their families (n = 11), who were currently making or had previously made treatment decisions, participated. Participants read the DA and completed validated and purpose-designed questionnaires. A follow-up semi-structured telephone interview elicited more in-depth DA feedback (n = 40).

Results

Patients and family endorsed the DA booklet as: easy-to-use (100% agree), useful in treatment decision-making (100%), presenting balanced (patients = 96.8%, family = 100%), up-to-date (93.5%, 100%) and trustworthy information (93.5%, 100%) that did not provoke anxiety (93.5%, 90.9%). All participants stated that they would recommend the DA to others. Following DA use, all except one participant (97.6%) demonstrated adequate treatment knowledge (> 50% score). Patients reported low decisional conflict (M = 18.90/100) following DA use and felt well-prepared to make treatment decisions (M = 4.28/5). Most patients (90.3%) indicated uptake of treatments consistent with the best available clinical evidence. Additionally, a large proportion of patients made an informed choice about medication (65.5%) with adjunctive psychological treatment (50.0%), based on adequate knowledge and their treatment values. Interview findings further supported the DA’s acceptability among participants.

Discussion

Pilot findings indicate that patients with BPII and their family consider this DA booklet highly acceptable and useful in making evidence-based treatment decisions that align with their treatment preferences.

Qualitative systematic review of barriers and facilitators to patient-involved antipsychotic prescribing

BACKGROUND

Despite policy and practice mandates for patient involvement, people with serious mental illness often feel marginalised in decisions about antipsychotic medication. Aims To examine stakeholder perspectives of barriers and facilitators to involving people with serious mental illness in antipsychotic prescribing decisions.

METHOD

Systematic thematic synthesis.

RESULTS

Synthesis of 29 studies identified the following key influences on involvement: patient's capability, desire and expectation for involvement, organisational context, and the consultation setting and processes.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal patient involvement in antipsychotic decisions demands that individual and contextual barriers are addressed. There was divergence in perceived barriers to involvement identified by patients and prescribers. For example, patients felt that lack of time in consultations was a barrier to involvement, something seldom raised by prescribers, who identified organisational barriers. Patients must understand their rights to involvement and the value of their expertise. Organisational initiatives should mandate prescriber responsibility to overcome barriers to involvement. Declaration of interest None.

Shared decision-making for psychiatric medication: A mixed-methods evaluation of a UK training programme for service users and clinicians

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is recognised as a promising strategy to enhance good collaboration between clinicians and service users, yet it is not practised regularly in mental health.

AIMS

Develop and evaluate a novel training programme to enhance SDM in psychiatric medication management for service users, psychiatrists and care co-ordinators.

METHODS

The training programme design was informed by existing literature and local stakeholders consultations. Parallel group-based training programmes on SDM process were delivered to community mental health service users and providers. Evaluation consisted of quantitative measures at baseline and 12-month follow-up, post-programme participant feedback and qualitative interviews.

RESULTS

Training was provided to 47 service users, 35 care-coordinators and 12 psychiatrists. Participant feedback was generally positive. Statistically significant changes in service users' decisional conflict and perceptions of practitioners' interactional style in promoting SDM occurred at the follow-up. Qualitative data suggested positive impacts on service users' and care co-ordinators confidence to explore medication experience, and group-based training was valued.

CONCLUSIONS

The programme was generally acceptable to service users and practitioners. This indicates the value of conducting a larger study and exploring application for non-medical decisions.

Discontinuing Psychiatric Medications: A Survey of Long-Term Users

OBJECTIVE

Individuals undergoing long-term psychiatric treatment frequently choose to stop taking psychiatric medications. To enhance service user choice and prevent undesirable outcomes, this first U.S. survey of a large sample of longer-term users sought to increase knowledge about users' experience of medication discontinuation.

METHODS

A sample of 250 U.S. adults with a diagnosis of serious mental illness and a recent goal to stop up to two prescribed psychiatric medications, which they had taken for at least nine months, completed a web-based survey about experiences, strategies, and supports during discontinuation.

RESULTS

About half (54%) met their goal of completely discontinuing one or more medications; 46% reported another outcome (use was reduced, use increased, or use stayed the same). Concerns about medications' effects (for example, long-term effects and side effects) prompted the decision to discontinue for 74% of respondents. They used various strategies to cope with withdrawal symptoms, which 54% rated as severe. Self-education and contact with friends and with others who had discontinued or reduced medications were most frequently cited as helpful. Although more than half rated the initial medication decision with prescribers as largely collaborative, only 45% rated prescribers as helpful during discontinuation. Of respondents who completely discontinued, 82% were satisfied with their decision.

CONCLUSIONS

Discontinuing psychiatric medication appears to be a complicated and difficult process, although most respondents reported satisfaction with their decision. Future research should guide health care systems and providers to better support patient choice and self-determination regarding the use and discontinuation of psychiatric medication.

A Qualitative Exploration of Clinician Views and Experiences of Treatment Decision-Making in Bipolar II Disorder

This study qualitatively explored clinicians' views and experiences of treatment decision-making in BPII. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 practising clinicians (n = 10 clinical psychologists, n = 6 GPs, n = 4 psychiatrists) with experience in treating adult outpatients with BPII. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed using framework methods. Professional experience, and preferences for patient involvement in decision-making were also assessed. Qualitative analyses yielded four inter-related themes: (1) (non-)acceptance of diagnosis and treatment; (2) types of decisions; (3) treatment uncertainty and balancing act; and (4) decision-making in consultations. Clinician preferences for treatment, professional experience, and self-reported preferences for patient/family involvement seemed to influence decision-making. This study is the first to explore clinician views and experiences of treatment decision-making in BPII. Findings demonstrate how clinician-related factors may shape treatment decision-making, and suggest potential problems such as patient perceptions of lower-than-preferred involvement.

Spot the difference: shared decision-making and supported decision-making in mental health

Respecting a person’s choices about the mental health services they do or do not use is a mark of quality support, and is often pursued for moral reasons, as a rights imperative and to improve outcomes. Yet, providing information and assistance for people making decisions about the mental health services can be a complex process, and has been approached in various ways. Two prominent approaches to this end are ‘shared decision-making’ and ‘supported decision-making’. This article considers each of these approaches, discussing points of similarity and difference and considering how the two might complement one another. By exploring the contribution that each approach can make, we conclude by proposing how future application of these approaches can account for the broader context of decisions, including support for ongoing decision-making; the multitude of service settings where decision-making occurs; and the diversity in supportive practices required to promote active involvement.

The least worst option: user experiences of antipsychotic medication and lack of involvement in medication decisions in a UK community sample

BACKGROUND

Treatment decision-making that fully involves service users is an aim across medicine, including mental health.

AIM

To explore service users experiences of taking antipsychotic medication for psychotic disorders and their perceptions of decision-making about this.

METHOD

Semi-structured interviews with 20 users of community mental health services, conducted by service user researchers and analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Antipsychotic medication was perceived to have beneficial effects on symptoms and relapse risk, but adverse effects were prominent, including a global state of lethargy and demotivation. Weighing these up, the majority viewed antipsychotics as the least worst option. Participants were split between positions of "willing acceptance", "resigned acceptance" and "non-acceptance" of taking antipsychotics. Many felt their choices about medication were limited, due to the nature of their illness or pressure from other people. They commonly experienced their prescribing psychiatrist as not sufficiently acknowledging the negative impacts of medication on life quality and physical health concerns and described feeling powerless to influence decisions about their medication.

CONCLUSION

The study highlights the complexity of agendas surrounding antipsychotic medication, including the pervasive influence of coercive processes and the challenges of implementing collaborative decision-making for people with serious mental health problems.

Shared decision-making in medication management: development of a training intervention

Shared decision-making is a collaborative process in which clinicians and patients make treatment decisions together. Although it is considered essential to patient-centred care, the adoption of shared decision-making into routine clinical practice has been slow, and there is a need to increase implementation. This paper describes the development and delivery of a training intervention to promote shared decision-making in medication management in mental health as part of the Shared Involvement in Medication Management Education (ShIMME) project. Three stakeholder groups (service users, care coordinators and psychiatrists) received training in shared decision-making, and their feedback was evaluated. The programme was mostly well received, with all groups rating interaction with peers as the best aspect of the training. This small-scale pilot shows that it is feasible to deliver training in shared decision-making to several key stakeholders. Larger studies will be required to assess the effectiveness of such training.

Implementing shared decision making in routine mental health care

Shared decision making (SDM) in mental health care involves clinicians and patients working together to make decisions. The key elements of SDM have been identified, decision support tools have been developed, and SDM has been recommended in mental health at policy level. Yet implementation remains limited. Two justifications are typically advanced in support of SDM. The clinical justification is that SDM leads to improved outcome, yet the available empirical evidence base is inconclusive. The ethical justification is that SDM is a right, but clinicians need to balance the biomedical ethical principles of autonomy and justice with beneficence and non-maleficence. It is argued that SDM is "polyvalent", a sociological concept which describes an idea commanding superficial but not deep agreement between disparate stakeholders. Implementing SDM in routine mental health services is as much a cultural as a technical problem. Three challenges are identified: creating widespread access to high-quality decision support tools; integrating SDM with other recovery-supporting interventions; and responding to cultural changes as patients develop the normal expectations of citizenship. Two approaches which may inform responses in the mental health system to these cultural changes - social marketing and the hospitality industry - are identified.

A qualitative study of online mental health information seeking behaviour by those with psychosis

BACKGROUND

The Internet and mobile technology are changing the way people learn about and manage their illnesses. Little is known about online mental health information seeking behaviour by people with psychosis. This paper explores the nature, extent and consequences of online mental health information seeking behaviour by people with psychosis and investigates the acceptability of a mobile mental health application (app).

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were carried out with people with psychosis (n = 22). Participants were purposively recruited through secondary care settings in London. The main topics discussed were participants' current and historical use of online mental health information and technology. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed by a team of researchers using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Mental health related Internet use was widespread. Eighteen people described searching the Internet to help them make sense of their psychotic experiences, and to read more information about their diagnosis, their prescribed psychiatric medication and its side-effects. Whilst some participants sought 'expert' online information from mental health clinicians and research journals, others described actively seeking first person perspectives. Eight participants used this information collaboratively with clinicians and spoke of the empowerment and independence the Internet offered them. However nine participants did not discuss their use of online mental health information with their clinicians for a number of reasons, including fear of undermining their clinician's authority. For some of these people concerns over what they had read led them to discontinue their antipsychotic medication without discussion with their mental health team.

CONCLUSIONS

People with psychosis use the Internet to acquire mental health related information. This can be a helpful source of supplementary information particularly for those who use it collaboratively with clinicians. When this information is not shared with their mental health team, it can affect patients' health care decisions. A partnership approach to online health-information seeking is needed, with mental health clinicians encouraging patients to discuss information they have found online as part of a shared decision-making process. Our research suggests that those with psychosis have active digital lives and that the introduction of a mental health app into services would potentially be well received.