Shared decision-making for people with asthma

Shared decision-making for supporting women's decisions about breast cancer screening

BACKGROUND

In breast cancer screening programmes, women may have discussions with a healthcare provider to help them decide whether or not they wish to join the breast cancer screening programme. This process is called shared decision-making (SDM) and involves discussions and decisions based on the evidence and the person's values and preferences. SDM is becoming a recommended approach in clinical guidelines, extending beyond decision aids. However, the overall effect of SDM in women deciding to participate in breast cancer screening remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of SDM on women's satisfaction, confidence, and knowledge when deciding whether to participate in breast cancer screening.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 8 August 2023. We also screened abstracts from two relevant conferences from 2020 to 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs assessing interventions targeting various components of SDM. The focus was on supporting women aged 40 to 75 at average or above-average risk of breast cancer in their decision to participate in breast cancer screening.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and conducted data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence. Review outcomes included satisfaction with the decision-making process, confidence in the decision made, knowledge of all options, adherence to the chosen option, women's involvement in SDM, woman-clinician communication, and mental health.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 19 studies with 64,215 randomised women, mostly with an average to moderate risk of breast cancer. Two studies covered all aspects of SDM; six examined shortened forms of SDM involving communication on risks and personal values; and 11 focused on enhanced communication of risk without other SDM aspects. SDM involving all components compared to control The two eligible studies did not assess satisfaction with the SDM process or confidence in the decision. Based on a single study, SDM showed uncertain effects on participant knowledge regarding the age to start screening (risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 2.28; 133 women; very low certainty evidence) and frequency of testing (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.04; 133 women; very low certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured. Abbreviated forms of SDM with clarification of values and preferences compared to control Of the six included studies, none evaluated satisfaction with the SDM process. These interventions may reduce conflict in the decision made, based on two measures, Decisional Conflict Scale scores (mean difference (MD) -1.60, 95% CI -4.21 to 0.87; conflict scale from 0 to 100; 4 studies; 1714 women; very low certainty evidence) and the proportion of women with residual conflict compared to control at one to three months' follow-up (rate of women with a conflicted decision, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.99; 1 study; 1001 women, very low certainty evidence). Knowledge of all options was assessed through knowledge scores and informed choice. The effect of SDM may enhance knowledge (MDs ranged from 0.47 to 1.44 higher scores on a scale from 0 to 10; 5 studies; 2114 women; low certainty evidence) and may lead to higher rates of informed choice (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.63; 4 studies; 2449 women; low certainty evidence) compared to control at one to three months' follow-up. These interventions may result in little to no difference in anxiety (MD 0.54, 95% -0.96 to 2.14; scale from 20 to 80; 2 studies; 749 women; low certainty evidence) and the number of women with worries about cancer compared to control at four to six weeks' follow-up (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.06; 1 study, 639 women; low certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured. Enhanced communication about risks without other SDM aspects compared to control Of 11 studies, three did not report relevant outcomes for this review, and none assessed satisfaction with the SDM process. Confidence in the decision made was measured by decisional conflict and anticipated regret of participating in screening or not. These interventions, without addressing values and preferences, may result in lower confidence in the decision compared to regular communication strategies at two weeks' follow-up (MD 2.89, 95% CI -2.35 to 8.14; Decisional Conflict Scale from 0 to 100; 2 studies; 1191 women; low certainty evidence). They may result in higher anticipated regret if participating in screening (MD 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.41) and lower anticipated regret if not participating in screening (MD -0.28, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.14). These interventions increase knowledge (MD 1.14, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.62; scale from 0 to 10; 4 studies; 2510 women; high certainty evidence), while it is unclear if there is a higher rate of informed choice compared to regular communication strategies at two to four weeks' follow-up (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.92; 2 studies; 1805 women; low certainty evidence). These interventions result in little to no difference in anxiety (MD 0.33, 95% CI -1.55 to 0.99; scale from 20 to 80) and depression (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.45; scale from 0 to 21; 2 studies; 1193 women; high certainty evidence) and lower cancer worry compared to control (MD -0.17, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.08; scale from 1 to 4; 1 study; 838 women; high certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Studies using abbreviated forms of SDM and other forms of enhanced communications indicated improvements in knowledge and reduced decisional conflict. However, uncertainty remains about the effect of SDM on supporting women's decisions. Most studies did not evaluate outcomes considered important for this review topic, and those that did measured different concepts. High-quality randomised trials are needed to evaluate SDM in diverse cultural settings with a focus on outcomes such as women's satisfaction with choices aligned to their values.

Medication Adherence in Children with Asthma

Asthma is the most common chronic disease in childhood. If untreated, asthma can lead to debilitating daily symptoms which affect quality of life, but more importantly can lead to fatal asthma attacks which unfortunately still occur globally. The most effective treatment strategy for controlling asthma is for the patient to follow a personalised asthma action plan (PAAP) which will invariably include regular use of an inhaled corticosteroid. To examine medication adherence in children with asthma, we collated recent evidence from systematic reviews in this area to address the following 5 key questions; What is adherence? Is there evidence that children are not adhering to preventer medication? Why is adherence poor and what are the barriers to adherence? Does good adherence improve outcomes in asthma? And lastly, how can treatment adherence be improved?

The Barriers to Shared Decision-making in Exercise Prescription for Children With Asthma: A Qualitative Study From Parents' Perspective

INTRODUCTION

The knowledge of barriers from the parental perspective is essential for facilitating shared decision-making in the field of pediatric asthma.

METHOD

Participants who were parents of children with a diagnosis of asthma were recruited, and in-depth, semistructured interviews were conducted. The interview transcripts were analyzed thematically using framework methods.

RESULTS

Seventeen participants undertook interviews. Three themes and nine subthemes emerged: (1) decision-making need level-limited understanding of decision-making knowledge, ambiguity regarding self-empowerment roles, and lack of family member support; (2) decision-making support level-insufficient ability to evaluate information, inefficient communication with health care professionals, and excessive use of professional terminology; and (3) decision-making outcome level-doubts about the final decision-making choices, time constraints on decision-making, and absence of mechanisms to track decisions made.

DISCUSSION

The findings would serve as crucial foundations for the development of decision-aid programs within the context of pediatric asthma.

Insights for Healthcare Providers on Shared Decision-Making in Multiple Sclerosis: A Narrative Review

Shared decision-making (SDM) between the patient and their healthcare provider (HCP) in developing treatment plans is increasingly recognized as central to improving treatment adherence and, ultimately, patient outcomes. In multiple sclerosis (MS), SDM is particularly crucial for optimizing treatment in a landscape that has grown more complex with the availability of newer, high-efficacy MS therapies. However, little direct evidence on the effectiveness of SDM is available to guide practice. Multiple factors, including patient age, ethnic background, perceptions, invisible MS symptoms, and psychological comorbidities can influence a patient's willingness and ability to participate in SDM. HCPs need to appreciate these factors and ask the right questions to break down obstacles to SDM. The HCP has a responsibility to help patients feel adequately informed and comfortable in having an active role in their care. This review identifies potential barriers to SDM and provides a strategy for HCPs to overcome these obstacles through patient (and caregiver) discussions to ensure optimal patient satisfaction with treatment and thus the best possible outcomes for their patients.

An evidence gap map of interventions for noncommunicable diseases and risk factors among children and adolescents

Substance misuse, obesity, mental health conditions, type 1 diabetes, cancers, and cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases together account for 41% of disability-adjusted life years linked to noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) among children and adolescents worldwide. However, the evidence on risk factors and interventions for this age group is scarce. Here we searched four databases to generate an evidence gap map of existing interventions and research gaps for these risk factors and NCDs. We mapped 159 reviews with 2,611 primary studies; most (96.2%) were conducted in high-income countries, and only 100 studies (3.8%) were from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The efficacy of therapeutic interventions on biomarkers and adverse events for NCDs appears to be well evidenced. Interventions for mental health conditions appear to be moderately evidenced, while interventions for obesity and substance misuse appear to be moderate to very low evidenced. Priority areas for future research include evaluating digital health platforms to support primary NCD prevention and management, and evaluating the impact of policy changes on the prevalence of obesity and substance misuse. Our findings highlight the wide disparity of evidence between high-income countries and LMICs. There is an urgent need for increased, targeted financing to address the research gaps in LMICs.

The Effect of Diabetes Management Shared Care Clinic on Glycated Hemoglobin A1c Compliance and Self-Management Abilities in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Objective

We aim to evaluate the impact of diabetes management shared care clinic (DMSCC) on glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) compliance and self-management abilities in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Methods

This study was a prospective cohort study of patients with T2DM participating in the DMSCC. At baseline and after management, the HbA1c levels were measured, the HbA1c compliance rate were calculated, and the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities-6 (SDSCA-6), Diabetes Empowerment Scale-DAWN Short Form (DES-DSF), and Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale-Five-item Short Form (PAID-5) were completed. These pre- and post-management data were compared.

Results

A total of 124 eligible patients were enrolled. After the diabetes management of DMSCC, the average HbA1c decreased and the HbA1c compliance rate increased significantly (P < 0.01). SDSCA-6 showed significant improvement in physical activity, glycemic monitoring, smoking (P < 0.01), and taking medication (P < 0.05). DES-DSF suggested a greater willingness to try to effectively treat diabetes (P < 0.05). PAID-5 indicated significant improvement in diabetes-related emotional distress.

Conclusion

DMSCC can help patients with T2DM reduce HbA1c, increase HbA1c compliance, improve diabetes self-management behaviors, empowerment, and diabetes-related emotional distress and serve as an effective exploration and practice of diabetes self-management education and support.

Personalised management and supporting individuals to live with their asthma in a primary care setting

INTRODUCTION

Complementing recognition of biomedical phenotypes, a primary care approach to asthma care recognizes diversity of disease, health beliefs, and lifestyle at a population and individual level.

AREAS COVERED

We review six aspects of personalized care particularly pertinent to primary care management of asthma: personalizing support for individuals living with asthma; targeting asthma care within populations; managing phenotypes of wheezy pre-school children; personalizing management to the individual; meeting individual preferences for provision of asthma care; optimizing digital approaches to enhance personalized care.

EXPERT OPINION

In a primary care setting, personalized management and supporting individuals to live with asthma extend beyond the contemporary concepts of biological phenotypes and pharmacological 'treatable traits' to encompass evidence-based tailored support for self-management, and delivery of patient-centered care including motivational interviewing. It extends to how we organize clinical practiceand the choices provided in mode of consultation. Diagnostic uncertainty due to recognition of phenotypes of pre-school wheeze remains a challenge for primary care. Digital health can support personalized management, but there are concerns about increasing inequities. This broad approach reflects the traditionally holistic ethos of primary care ('knowing their patients and understanding their communities'), but the core concepts resonate with all healthcare.

Patients' preferences in therapeutic decision-making in digestive oncology: a single centre cross-sectional observational study

Considering the preferences in Shared Decision Making (SDM) of patients with Digestive Cancer (DC) is crucial to ensure the quality of care. To date, there is limited information on preferences in SDM of patients with DC. The objectives of this study were to describe digestive cancer patients' preference for involvement in therapeutic decision-making and to identify variables associated with these preferences. An observational prospective study in a French university cancer center has been conducted. Patients completed two questionnaires to qualify and quantify their preference for involvement in therapeutic decision-making: the Control Preference Scale (CPS) and the Autonomy Preference Index (API), which is composed of the Decision Making (DM) score and the Information Seeking (IS) score. Associations between these scores and socio-demographic data, disease-related data, coping strategies (Brief-COPE), physical (QLQ-C30) and psychological (HADS) quality of life were tested. One-hundred fifteen patients returned the questionnaires. The majority of patients reported a passive (49.1%) or a collaborative (43.0%) CPS status. The mean DM score was 39.4 Variables associated with decision-making preferences were occupational status and time since diagnosis. The identification of variables associated with patients' preferences for involvement in decision-making can help make clinicians aware of patients' needs and wishes. However, it can only be determined by interviewing the patient individually.

Systematic review of shared decision-making interventions for people living with chronic respiratory diseases

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision-making (SDM) supports patients to make informed and value-based decisions about their care. We are developing an intervention to enable healthcare professionals to support patients' pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) decision-making. To identify intervention components we needed to evaluate others carried out in chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs). We aimed to evaluate the impact of SDM interventions on patient decision-making (primary outcome) and downstream health-related outcomes (secondary outcome).

DESIGN

We conducted a systematic review using the risk of bias (Cochrane ROB2, ROBINS-I) and certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) tools.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCHINFO, CINAHL, PEDRO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal, ClinicalTrials.gov, PROSPERO, ISRCTN were search through to 11th April 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Trials evaluating SDM interventions in patients living with CRD using quantitative or mixed methods were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data, assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence. A narrative synthesis, with reference to The Making Informed Decisions Individually and Together (MIND-IT) model, was undertaken.

RESULTS

Eight studies (n=1596 (of 17 466 citations identified)) fulfilled the inclusion criteria.Five studies included components targeting the patient, healthcare professionals and consultation process (demonstrating adherence to the MIND-IT model). All studies reported their interventions improved patient decision-making and health-related outcomes. No outcome was reported consistently across studies. Four studies had high risk of bias, three had low quality of evidence. Intervention fidelity was reported in two studies.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest developing an SDM intervention including a patient decision aid, healthcare professional training, and a consultation prompt could support patient PR decisions, and health-related outcomes. Using a complex intervention development and evaluation research framework will likely lead to more robust research, and a greater understanding of service needs when integrating the intervention within practice.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020169897.

COMPETENCIES AND SKILLS NEEDED IN THE MANAGEMENT OF CHRONIC PATIENTS' NEEDS THROUGH TELECARE

OBJECTIVE

Aim: To identify the necessary competencies that future professionals must obtain in order to effectively manage patients with chronic conditions. We employed a multilayer review in PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and Methods: We applied three searches in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane using various terms in order to identify the necessary skills and competences needed for healthcare professionals to provide distance care in patients with chronic conditions. From the initial search, a total of 1008 studies were identified while 54 met the inclusion criteria and were retained for data extraction. After the review of the 54 studies, we grouped the proposed skills and competencies in eight major categories. Those groups were Clinical Knowledge, Critical Thinking Skills, Technological Skills, Clinical skills, Communication skills, Implementation skills, Professionalism and professional ethics, Evidence based Practice.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: Although telehealth is gaining ground in healthcare practice and healthcare professionals possess the necessary knowledge and skills to provide safe, effective, and personalized care, additional specialized training is nevertheless required to provide telecare. Therefore, the integration of telehealth into various healthcare professions curricula - both at undergraduate and postgraduate levels - is required for the development of education and the dynamic development of healthcare.

Life Course of Asthma

Asthma is a heterogeneous chronic airway disease that can vary over a lifetime. Although broad categories of asthma by severity and type have been constructed, there remains a tremendous opportunity to discover an approach to managing asthma with additional factors in mind. Many in the field have suggested and are pursuing a novel paradigm shift in how asthma might be better managed, considering the life course of exposures, management priorities, and predicted trajectory of lung function growth. This approach will require a more holistic view of prenatal, postnatal, adolescence, hormonal and gender aspects, and the aging process. In addition, the environment, externally and internally, including in one's genetic code and epigenetic changes, are factors that affect how asthma progresses or becomes more stable in individuals. This chapter focuses on the various influences that may, to differing degrees, affect people with asthma, which can develop at any time in their lives. Shifting the paradigm of thought and strategies for care and advocating for public policies and health delivery that focus on this philosophy is paramount to advance asthma care for all.

Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions

BACKGROUND

One person in every four will suffer from a diagnosable mental health condition during their life. Such conditions can have a devastating impact on the lives of the individual and their family, as well as society.  International healthcare policy makers have increasingly advocated and enshrined partnership models of mental health care. Shared decision-making (SDM) is one such partnership approach. Shared decision-making is a form of service user-provider communication where both parties are acknowledged to bring expertise to the process and work in partnership to make a decision.  This review assesses whether SDM interventions improve a range of outcomes. This is the first update of this Cochrane Review, first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of SDM interventions for people of all ages with mental health conditions, directed at people with mental health conditions, carers, or healthcare professionals, on a range of outcomes including: clinical outcomes, participation/involvement in decision-making process (observations on the process of SDM; user-reported, SDM-specific outcomes of encounters), recovery, satisfaction, knowledge, treatment/medication continuation, health service outcomes, and adverse outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran searches in January 2020 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO (2009 to January 2020). We also searched trial registers and the bibliographies of relevant papers, and contacted authors of included studies.  We updated the searches in February 2022. When we identified studies as potentially relevant, we labelled these as studies awaiting classification.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-randomised controlled trials, of SDM interventions in people with mental health conditions (by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Classification of Diseases (ICD) criteria).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review included 13 new studies, for a total of 15 RCTs. Most participants were adults with severe mental illnesses such as schizophrenia, depression, and bipolar disorder, in higher-income countries. None of the studies included children or adolescents.  Primary outcomes We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve clinical outcomes, such as psychiatric symptoms, depression, anxiety, and readmission, compared with control due to very low-certainty evidence. For readmission, we conducted subgroup analysis between studies that used usual care and those that used cognitive training in the control group. There were no subgroup differences. Regarding participation (by the person with the mental health condition) or level of involvement in the decision-making process, we are uncertain if SDM interventions improve observations on the process of SDM compared with no intervention due to very low-certainty evidence. On the other hand, SDM interventions may improve SDM-specific user-reported outcomes from encounters immediately after intervention compared with no intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 1.01; 3 studies, 534 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, there was insufficient evidence for sustained participation or involvement in the decision-making processes. Secondary outcomes We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve recovery compared with no intervention due to very low-certainty evidence. We are uncertain if SDM interventions improve users' overall satisfaction. However, one study (241 participants) showed that SDM interventions probably improve some aspects of users' satisfaction with received information compared with no intervention: information given was rated as helpful (risk ratio (RR) 1.33, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.65); participants expressed a strong desire to receive information this way for other treatment decisions (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.68); and strongly recommended the information be shared with others in this way (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.58). The evidence was of moderate certainty for these outcomes. However, this same study reported there may be little or no effect on amount or clarity of information, while another small study reported there may be little or no change in carer satisfaction with the SDM intervention. The effects of healthcare professional satisfaction were mixed: SDM interventions may have little or no effect on healthcare professional satisfaction when measured continuously, but probably improve healthcare professional satisfaction when assessed categorically. We are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve knowledge, treatment continuation assessed through clinic visits, medication continuation, carer participation, and the relationship between users and healthcare professionals because of very low-certainty evidence. Regarding length of consultation, SDM interventions probably have little or no effect compared with no intervention (SDM 0.09, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.41; 2 studies, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). On the other hand, we are uncertain whether SDM interventions improve length of hospital stay due to very low-certainty evidence. There were no adverse effects on health outcomes and no other adverse events reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review update suggests that people exposed to SDM interventions may perceive greater levels of involvement immediately after an encounter compared with those in control groups. Moreover, SDM interventions probably have little or no effect on the length of consultations.  Overall we found that most evidence was of low or very low certainty, meaning there is a generally low level of certainty about the effects of SDM interventions based on the studies assembled thus far. There is a need for further research in this area.

Suboptimal Control of Asthma Among Diverse Patients: A US Mixed Methods Focus Group Study

Purpose

The US National Asthma Education and Prevention Program updates and Global Initiative for Asthma report encourage considering the patient perspective to improve asthma control. The objective of the present study was to collect data about the perceptions, experiences, and concerns of adult patients and caregivers of children with asthma regarding rescue, maintenance, and oral corticosteroid treatments.

Patients and Methods

In-person focus groups were conducted in three cities across the US. Participants also completed patient-reported outcome measures assessing asthma control and experiences.

Results

Focus groups were conducted in demographically and clinically diverse adults with asthma (five groups, n=34), caregivers of children with asthma (five groups, n=35), and adults with a dual diagnosis of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (one group, n=5). Only 28% of patients were well-controlled by Asthma Control Test/Asthma Control Test-Caregiver Report and 18% by Asthma Impairment and Risk Questionnaire. Forty-four percent of participants reported not following their prescribed medical plan. Four key themes emerged from the focus groups: (1) asthma symptom control and monitoring are often inadequate; (2) treatments are often used incorrectly; (3) communication between health care professionals and patients or caregivers is often ineffective; and (4) concerns related to treatment and desires to improve treatment.

Conclusion

Control of asthma symptoms is suboptimal in the vast majority of patients and both patients and caregivers do not feel sufficiently informed about asthma. Health care providers should be encouraged to engage patients and caregivers in shared decision making for managing asthma and selecting treatments that integrate patient values, preferences, and lifestyles.

Exploring patient centredness, communication and shared decision-making under a new model of care: Community rehabilitation in canada

Patient-centred care and patient engagement in healthcare and health research are widely mandated by funders, health systems and institutions. Increasingly, shared decision-making (SDM) is recognised as promoting patient-centred care. We explore this relationship by studying SDM in the context of integrating novel patient-centred policies in community rehabilitation. There is little research on SDM in rehabilitation, and less so in the critical community context. Patient co-investigators led study co-design. We aimed to describe how patients and providers experience SDM at community rehabilitation sites that adopted a novel, patient-centred Rehabilitation Model of Care (RMoC). Guided by focused ethnography, we conducted focus groups and interviews. Patient and professional participants were recruited from 10 RMoC early-adopter community rehabilitation sites. Sites varied in geography, patient population and provider disciplines. Patient and community engagement researchers used a set-collect-reflect method to document patient perspectives. Researchers captured provider perspectives using a semi-structured question guide. We completed 11 focus groups and 18 interviews (n = 45 providers, n = 17 patients). We found that most early-adopter providers spoke in a shared, patient-first language that focused on patient readiness, barriers and active listening. Congruent patient perceptions reflected inclusion in decision-making, goal setting and positive relationships. Many patients queried how care would become and remain accessible before and after community rehabilitation care respectively. Remaining connected while in the community was described as important to patients. Providers identified barriers like time, team dynamics and lack of clarity on the RMoC aims, which challenged the initiative's long-term sustainability. Policy innovations can promote SDM and communication through multiple strategies and training to facilitate candid, encouraging conversations. Sustainability of SDM gains is paramount. Most providers moved beyond tokenistic engagement, but competing responsibilities and team member resistance could thwart continuity. Further research is needed to empirically assess respectful and compassionate communication and SDM in community rehabilitation long term.

A Renewed Charter: Key Principles to Improve Patient Care in Severe Asthma

Asthma is a heterogenous respiratory disease, usually associated with chronic airway inflammation and hyper-responsiveness, which affects an estimated 339 million people worldwide. Severe asthma affects approximately 5-10% of patients with asthma, approximately 17-34 million people globally, more than half of whom have uncontrolled disease. Severe asthma carries a substantial burden of disease, including unpredictable symptoms and potentially life-threatening flare-ups. Furthermore, severe asthma has a substantial burden on health care systems and economies worldwide. In 2018, a group of experts from the clinical community, patient support groups, and professional organisations joined together to develop the Severe Asthma Patient Charter, which set out six principles to define what patients should expect for the management of their severe asthma and what should constitute a basic standard of care. Since the publication of that original Charter in 2018, several important changes have occurred, including an improved understanding of asthma and effective asthma management; several new therapies have become available; and finally, the COVID-19 pandemic has placed a spotlight on respiratory conditions, the workforces that treat them, and the fundamental importance of health care system resilience. With those developments in mind, we, representatives of the academic, clinical, and patient advocacy group communities, have updated the Charter to Improve Patient Care in Severe Asthma with a focus on six principles: (1) I deserve a timely, comprehensive assessment of my asthma and its severity; (2) I deserve a timely, straightforward referral to an appropriate specialist for my asthma when it is not well controlled; (3) I deserve to understand what makes my asthma worse; (4) I deserve access to treatment and care that reduces the impact of asthma on my daily life; (5) I deserve not to be reliant on systemic corticosteroids; (6) I deserve to be involved in decisions about my treatment and care.

Concordance and Patient-Centered Care in Medicaid Enrollees' Care Experience With Providers

Patient-centered care is at the nexus of several overlapping institutional reforms to improve health care system performance. However, we know little regarding Medicaid patients' experience with their doctors along several key dimensions of patient-centered care, and how their experience compares with Medicare and privately insured patients. We studied 4 outcomes using the 2017 National Health Interview Survey: patient-provider concordance on racial/sexual/cultural identity, respectful provider attitude, solicitation of patient opinion/beliefs during the care encounter, and patient-centered communication (PCC). The primary independent variable was Medicaid enrollee status. We dichotomized responses and ran multivariate logistic regressions for each type of care experience outcome, controlling for sociodemographic factors, health care access, and health care utilization of respondents. Compared to Medicare and privately insured enrollees, Medicaid enrollees reported much lower odds of seeing providers who treated them with respect (OR = 1.91, P < .001; OR = 1.62, P < .01) and who offered PCC (OR = 1.35, P < .05; OR = 1.35, P < .01), but similar odds of seeing concordant providers (OR = 0.78, P = .96; OR = 0.96, P = .72). Importantly, Medicaid enrollees reported higher odds of seeing providers who solicited their opinion/beliefs/preferences than their Medicare or privately insured counterparts (OR = 0.82, P < .05; OR = 0.87 P < .10). Medicaid enrollees report less patient-centered experiences in some important facets of their provider interaction than their Medicare or privately insured counterparts. Federal, state, and local policies and practices directed at improving these facets of patient-provider interaction are needed and should be aimed squarely at Medicaid providers, especially those working in geographic areas and settings with a disproportionate number of racial, gender, cultural, and linguistic minorities.

Real-world Drivers Behind Communication, Medication Adherence, and Shared Decision Making In Minority Adults with Asthma

Background:

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the foundation of asthma management. However, ICS non-adherence is common. Black adults have lower ICS adherence than white adults, which likely contributes, in part, to the asthma disparities that Black adults experience.

Objective:

To explore how Black adults with uncontrolled asthma and their primary care providers communicated about ICS non-adherence and used shared decision-making to identify strategies to increase ICS use.

Design:

Eighty routine clinical visits for uncontrolled asthma were audio recorded and inductively analyzed using methods adapted from grounded theory methodology.

Participants:

Study participants included 80 Black adults (83% female) largely low-income (83% Medicaid) and their 10 primary care providers. The study settings were 2 Federally Qualified Health Centers.

Key Results:

Three overarching themes were identified: (1) ICS misuse and lack of knowledge; (2) external influences informed personal misconceptions about ICS; and (3) patient-provider communication to individualize plan of care.

Conclusions:

Reasons for ICS non-adherence in Black adults with uncontrolled asthma offer potential targets for interventions that facilitate enhanced adherence. Future research should include PCP training on strategies that support patient-centered care, such as communication, shared decision-making and patient engagement.

Treatment Adherence in Integrative Medicine-Part One: Review of Literature

Treatment adherence is a topic that is well studied but not well understood. Low treatment adherence is a significant issue that limits the effective management and treatment of chronic conditions, creating significant health care burden, costs, and poor patient outcomes. This report provides a review of the factors that facilitate or create barriers to treatment adherence, as well as strategies recommended to overcome adherence barriers. A total of 25 interviews were conducted with practitioners demonstrating both high (n = 16) and low (n = 9) treatment adherence rates. A total of 185 survey responses were received from high-treatment adherence rate practitioners (n = 21), low-treatment adherence rate practitioners (n = 83), and practitioners that were neither in the high- or low-treatment adherence rate range (n = 81). Practitioner prescribing behaviors and adherence statistics were determined and stratified by high-treatment adherence rate and low-treatment adherence rate practitioners. From the interviews, 78% of low-rate practitioners mentioned that establishing trust is a primary best practice for optimizing adherence, and for high-rate practitioners, 69% thought that facilitating trust was important to optimizing adherence. Both low- and high-adherence rate practitioners prioritized using a staged approach as a strategy to overcome barriers to adherence. From the total survey sample it was found that key strategies to improving adherence included the practice of booking follow-up appointments, using lab results to explain treatment plans, and using a staged approach for treatment plans. Our research sought to elicit strategies and skills that can help improve treatment adherence in integrative medicine and our findings have identified several common practices that can help to improve adherence. Research taking advantage of mobile devices and the internet for adherence has started to expand within the last 10 to 15 years. Technology has the potential to lead the development and establishment of a centralized database that acquires adherence information and provides solutions to its practitioners and patients. Further work to advance the field of integrative medicine through additional research and interventions that support treatment adherence would be valuable to the effective treatment and management of integrative medicine patients.

Patterns of Asthma Medication Use across the Transition to High School

OBJECTIVE

Adherence to asthma controller medications is suboptimal among adolescents. We evaluated predictors of adherence and longitudinal patterns of medication use between 8th and 10th grade among a sample of youth of diverse race/ethnicity.

METHODS

Eighth graders with asthma on controller medications (N = 62; 40.0% non-Latino white; 23.7% Black; 37.3% Latino; 37.3% female) completed measures of medication beliefs, responsibility for asthma management, and family cohesion. Objective methods tracked medication use longitudinally.

RESULTS

Adherence declined during the high school transition, from 48.0% in eighth grade to 34.1% in tenth grade (F = 5.35, p < .01). Males had lower adherence (b = -10.11, SE = 5.37, p = .02, f2 = 0.11), as did Latino youth (b = -12.21, SE = 8.23, p = .03, f2 = 0.12). Family cohesion was associated with higher adherence (b = 4.38, SE = 1.98, p = .04, f2 = 0.06). Latent class models (LCMs) suggested a three-class model of longitudinal adherence patterns. This included low, declining adherence (Class 1 = 29%; higher proportion male, p = .02), high, sustained adherence (Class 2 = 26%, high family cohesion, p = .05, higher proportion female, p = .02), and low, sustained adherence (Class 3 = 45%; higher proportion Latino, p = .05, higher proportion male, p = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Asthma medication adherence declined between 8th and 10th grade. LCMs indicated some youth have stable patterns of adherence (high or low), whereas others demonstrate declines. Gender differences were observed, and family cohesion was associated with higher, sustained adherence. Interventions building on family resources and targeting the barriers adolescents face are necessary to improve asthma management during this vulnerable period.

African Americans Want a Focus on Shared Decision-Making in Asthma Adherence Interventions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) reduce asthma-related morbidity and mortality. However, ICS non-adherence is more common in African American (AA) adults than White adults and explains, in part, the marked asthma disparities that AAs experience. We aimed to understand how ICS non-adherence could be addressed from the perspective of AA adults with asthma, their family, and friends.

METHODS

We held six focus groups at two urban federally qualified health centers separately with adult asthma patients (n = 2), patients' family/friends (n = 2), and patients and family/friends together (n = 2). Qualitative descriptive methodology guided the design and the conduct of focus groups. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed by three coders working independently using conventional content analysis to capture responses to interview questions and identify emergent categories.

RESULTS

Forty-six AA adults participated (32 patients, 14 family/friends); 67% were female. Participants stated that ICS adherence could be improved if they were heard, respected, and received patient-centered care, and if providers highlighted the risk of ICS non-adherence at clinic visits. Though not explicitly described by participants as shared decision-making (SDM), what they described included many essential elements of SDM.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants desired SDM and offered reasons for ICS non-adherence that could be used to inform an SDM intervention for clinical application. Strategies informed by the recipients of care and delivered by providers during routine office visits offer a scalable approach to narrowing asthma disparities experienced by AA adults.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03036267.

Shared Decision-Making in Breast Reconstruction for Breast Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review

For most breast cancer (BC) patients who have undergone a mastectomy, the decision whether to proceed with breast reconstruction (BR) is complicated and requires deliberation. Shared decision-making (SDM) helps to address those needs and promote informed value-based decisions. However, little is known about the SDM status for BR in BC patients. This scoping review describes: 1) basic characteristics of studies on BR SDM in BC patients; 2) factors influencing BR SDM in BC patients; 3) experience and perception of BR SDM in BC patients; and 4) outcome measures reported. This review was performed in accordance with the Arksey and O'Malley methodology. A total of 5 English and 4 Chinese databases were searched, as well as different sources from grey literature. The data extraction form was developed by referring to the objectives and the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF). Data was analyzed using thematic analysis, framework analysis and descriptive statistics, with findings presented in the tables and diagrams. A total of 1481 records were retrieved and 42 of these included after screening. In 21 (21/42, 50%) of the studies, patient decision aids (PDAs) were utilized, and in 17 (17/42, 40.48%) of the studies, the factors influencing the implementation of SDM were explored. Of these 17 studies, the factors influencing the implementation of SDM were categorized into the following: the patient level (17/17, 100%), the healthcare level (2/17, 11.76%) and the organizational and system level (7/17, 41.18%). A total of 8 (19.05%) of the 42 studies focused on patients' experiences and perceptions of SDM, and all studies used qualitative research methods. Of these 8 studies, a total of 7 (7/8, 87.50%) focused on patients' experiences of SDM participation, and 4 (4/8, 50.00%) focused on patients' perceptions of SDM. A total of 24 studies (24/42, 57.14%) involved quantitative outcome measures, where 49 items were divided into three classifications according to the outcomes of ODSF: the quality of the decision (17/24, 70.83%), the quality of the decision-making process (20/24, 83.33%), and impact (13/24, 54.17%). Although researchers have paid less attention to other research points in the field of SDM, compared to the design and application of SDM interventional tools, the research team still presents some equally noteworthy points through scoping review. For instance, the various factors influencing BC patients' participation in SDM for BR (especially at the healthcare provider level and at the organizational system level), patients' experiences and perceptions. Systematic reviews (SRs) should be conducted to quantify the impact of these different factors on BR SDM. Implementation of scientific theories and methods can inform the exploration and integration of these factors.

Mapping and understanding the decision-making process for providing nutrition and hydration to people living with dementia: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review aimed to explore the process of decision-making for nutrition and hydration for people living with dementia from the perspectives and experiences of all involved.

METHODS

We searched CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases. Search terms were related to dementia, decision-making, nutrition and hydration. Qualitative, quantitative and case studies that focused on decision-making about nutrition and hydration for people living with dementia were included. The CASP and Murad tools were used to appraise the quality of included studies. Data extraction was guided by the Interprofessional Shared Decision Making (IP-SDM) model. We conducted a narrative synthesis using thematic analysis. PROSPERO registration number CRD42019131497.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies were included (20 qualitative, 15 quantitative and 10 case studies), comprising data from 17 countries and 6020 patients, family caregivers and practitioners. The studies covered a range of decisions from managing oral feeding to the use of tube feeding. We found that decisions about nutrition and hydration for people living with dementia were generally too complex to be mapped onto the precise linear steps of the existing decision-making model. Decision-making processes around feeding for people living with dementia were largely influenced by medical evidence, personal values, cultures and organizational routine. Although the process involved multiple people, family caregivers and non-physician practitioners were often excluded in making a final decision. Upon disagreement, nutrition interventions were sometimes delivered with conflicting feelings concealed by family caregivers or practitioners. Most conflicts and negative feelings were resolved by good relationship, honest communication, multidisciplinary team meetings and renegotiation.

CONCLUSIONS

The decision-making process regarding nutrition and hydration for people living with dementia does not follow a linear process. It needs an informed, value-sensitive, and collaborative process. However, it often characterized by unclear procedures and with a lack of support. Decisional support is needed and should be approached in a shared and stepwise manner.

Group-randomized trial of tailored brief shared decision-making to improve asthma control in urban black adults

AIMS

To assess the intervention effects of BREATHE (BRief intervention to Evaluate Asthma THErapy), a novel brief shared decision-making intervention and evaluate feasibility and acceptability of intervention procedures.

DESIGN

Group-randomized longitudinal pilot study.

METHODS

In total, 80 adults with uncontrolled persistent asthma participated in a trial comparing BREATHE (N = 40) to a dose-matched attention control intervention (N = 40). BREATHE is a one-time shared decision-making intervention delivered by clinicians during routine office visits. Ten clinicians were randomized and trained on BREATHE or the control condition. Participants were followed monthly for 3 months post-intervention. Data were collected from December 2017 - May 2019 and included surveys, lung function tests, and interviews.

RESULTS

Participants were Black/multiracial (100%) mostly female (83%) adults (mean age 45). BREATHE clinicians delivered BREATHE to all 40 participants with fidelity based on expert review of audiorecordings. While the control group reported improvements in asthma control at 1-month and 3-month follow-up, only BREATHE participants had better asthma control at each timepoint (β = 0.77; standard error (SE)[0.17]; p ≤ 0.0001; β = 0.71; SE[0.16]; p ≤ 0.0001; β = 0.54; SE[0.15]; p = .0004), exceeding the minimally important difference. BREATHE participants also perceived greater shared decision-making occurred during the intervention visit (β = 7.39; SE[3.51]; p = .03) and fewer symptoms at follow-up (e.g., fewer nights woken, less shortness of breath and less severity of symptoms) than the controls. Both groups reported improved adherence and fewer erroneous medication beliefs.

CONCLUSION

BREATHE is a promising brief tailored intervention that can be integrated into office visits using clinicians as interventionists. Thus, BREATHE offers a pragmatic approach to improving asthma outcomes and shared decision-making in a health disparity population.

IMPACT

The study addressed the important problem of uncontrolled asthma in a high-risk vulnerable population. Compared with the dose-matched attention control condition, participants receiving the novel brief tailored shared decision-making intervention had significant improvements in asthma outcomes and greater perceived engagement in shared decision-making. Brief interventions integrated into office visits and delivered by clinicians may offer a pragmatic approach to narrowing health disparity gaps. Future studies where other team members (e.g., office nurses, social workers) are trained in shared decision-making may address important implementation science challenges as it relates to adoption, maintenance, and dissemination. TRAIL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov # NCT03300752.

Barriers and Enablers to Using a Patient-Facing Electronic Questionnaire: A Qualitative Theoretical Domains Framework Analysis

BACKGROUND

Electronic patient questionnaires are becoming ubiquitous in health care. To address care gaps that contribute to poor asthma management, we developed the Electronic Asthma Management System, which includes a previsit electronic patient questionnaire linked to a computerized clinical decision support system.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to identify the determinants (barriers and enablers) of patient uptake and completion of a previsit mobile health questionnaire.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with adult patients with asthma in Toronto, Canada. After demonstrating the questionnaire, participants completed the questionnaire using their smartphones and were then interviewed regarding perceived barriers and enablers to using and completing the questionnaire. Interview questions were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify the determinants of health-related behavior. We generated themes that addressed the enablers and barriers to the uptake and completion of the questionnaire.

RESULTS

In total, 12 participants were interviewed for saturation. Key enablers were as follows: the questionnaire was easy to complete without additional knowledge or skills and was perceived as a priority and responsibility for patients, use could lead to more efficient and personalized care, completion on one's own time would be convenient, and uptake and completion could be optimized through patient reminders. Concerns about data security, the usefulness of questionnaire data, the stress of completing it accurately and on time, competing priorities, and preferences to complete the questionnaire on other devices were the main barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

The barriers and enablers identified by patients should be addressed by developing implementation strategies to enhance e-questionnaire use and completion by patients. As the use of e-questionnaires grows, our findings will contribute to implementation efforts across settings and diseases.

Successful implementation of isoniazid preventive therapy at a pediatric HIV clinic in Tanzania

BACKGROUND

In accordance with international guidance for tuberculosis (TB) prevention, the Tanzanian Ministry of Health recommends isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) for children aged 12 months and older who are living with HIV. Concerns about tolerability, adherence, and potential mistreatment of undiagnosed TB with monotherapy have limited uptake of IPT globally, especially among children, in whom diagnostic confirmation is challenging. We assessed IPT implementation and adherence at a pediatric HIV clinic in Tanzania.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, eligible children living with HIV aged 1-15 years receiving care at the DarDar Pediatric Program in Dar es Salaam who screened negative for TB disease were offered a 6-month regimen of daily isoniazid. Patients could choose to receive IPT via facility- or community-based care. Parents/caregivers and children provided informed consent and verbal assent respectively. Isoniazid was dispensed with the child's antiretroviral therapy every 1-3 months. IPT adherence and treatment completion was determined by pill counts, appointment attendance, and self-report. Patients underwent TB symptom screening at every visit.

RESULTS

We enrolled 66 children between July and December 2017. No patients/caregivers declined IPT. Most participants were female (n = 43, 65.1%) and the median age was 11 years (interquartile range [IQR] 8, 13). 63 (95.5%) participants chose the facility-based model; due to the small number of participants who chose the community-based model, valid comparisons between the two groups could not be made. Forty-nine participants (74.2%) completed IPT within 10 months. Among the remaining 17, 11 had IPT discontinued by their provider due to adverse drug reactions, 5 lacked documentation of completion, and 1 had unknown outcomes due to missing paperwork. Of those who completed IPT, the average monthly adherence was 98.0%. None of the participants were diagnosed with TB while taking IPT or during a median of 4 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

High adherence and treatment completion rates can be achieved when IPT is integrated into routine, self-selected facility-based pediatric HIV care. Improved record-keeping may yield even higher completion rates. IPT was well tolerated and no cases of TB were detected. IPT for children living with HIV is feasible and should be implemented throughout Tanzania.

Assessment of shared decision-making in community mental health care: Validation of the CollaboRATE

Background/Objective

CollaboRATE is a 3-item self-report measure of the patient experience of shared decision-making (SDM) process. The objective of this study is to assess the psychometric properties of CollaboRATE in community mental health care.

Method

A cross-sectional study was conducted at a Community Mental Health Center of the Canary Islands Health Service. Two hundred and fifty consecutive psychiatric outpatients were invited to participate. Of those, 191 accepted (76.40% of response rate) and completed the CollaboRATE, the Control Preferences Scale (CPS), and a form with sociodemographic and clinical variables.

Results

Exploratory factor analysis ratified the unidimensionality of the measure. High internal consistency was found (α Cronbach = .95, Guttman's λ = .93, and ω = .95). Strong positive correlations (p < .0001) were found between the CollaboRATE and the CPS. Only 39.80% of respondents gave the best possible score on CollaboRATE.

Conclusions

This study provides evidence for the reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the CollaboRATE as a measure of SDM. The measure is quick to complete and feasible for use in outpatient mental health care. At present, a significative number of psychiatric outpatients are not involved in SDM. The use of this measure in psychiatric routine care can be a key tool in assessing and implementing SDM.

Measuring shared decision-making and collaborative goal setting in community rehabilitation: a focused ethnography using cross-sectional surveys in Canada

OBJECTIVE

To describe and measure the shared decision-making (SDM) experience, including goal-setting experiences, from the perspective of patients and providers in diverse community-rehabilitation settings.

DESIGN

Prospective, longitudinal surveys.

SETTING

13 primary level-of-care community-rehabilitation sites in diverse areas varying in geography, patient population and provider discipline341 adult, English-speaking patient-participants, and 66 provider-participants.

MEASURES

Alberta Shared decision-maKing Measurement Instrument (dyadic tool measuring SDM), WatLX (outpatient rehabilitation experience) and demographic questionnaire. Survey packages distributed at two timepoints (T0=recruitment; T1=3 months later).

RESULTS

We found that among 341 patient-provider dyads, 26.4% agreed that the appointment at recruitment involved high-quality SDM. Patient perceptions of goal-setting suggested that 19.6% of patients did not set a goal for their care, and only 11.4% set goals in functional language that tied directly to an activity/role/responsibility that was meaningful to their life. Better SDM was clinically associated with higher total family income (p=0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide evidence for the importance of SDM and goal setting in community rehabilitation. Among patients, lower ratings of SDM corresponded with less recognition of their preferences. Actionable strategies include supporting financially vulnerable patients in realising SDM through training of providers to make extra space for such patients to share their preferences and better preparing patients to articulate their preferences. We recommend more research into strategies that advance highly functional goal setting with patients, and that lessen survey ceiling effects.

Essential Role of Pharmacists in Asthma Care and Management

Asthma, a chronic respiratory disease characterized by chronic airway inflammation, bronchial hyperresponsiveness, and reversible airflow obstruction, poses a substantial economic burden on patients and caregivers alike. Moreover, the heterogeneous nature of the disease and the presence of various phenotypes make the treatment of asthma challenging and nuanced. Despite the availability of several approved pharmacological treatments, approximately half of patients with asthma in the United States experienced exacerbations in 2016, highlighting the need for effective add-on treatments. Furthermore, asthma control remains suboptimal due to low adherence to medications, poor inhaler technique, and several patient-related factors. Importantly, the primary care setting, in which pharmacists play an integral role, represents a critical environment for providing long-term follow-up care for the effective management of chronic diseases, such as asthma. Pharmacists are uniquely positioned to ensure optimal clinical outcomes in patients with asthma since they have the clinical expertise to educate patients on their disease state and the role of asthma medications, provide training on inhalation technique, address patients’ concerns about potential side effects of medications, and improve adherence to therapy. Therefore, in this review article, we discuss the overall role of pharmacists in effective asthma care and management.

The impact of person-centred care on patient safety: An umbrella review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Nursing literature frequently emphasises the benefits of person-centred approaches for healthcare quality and safety.

OBJECTIVE

This umbrella review aimed to synthesise the combined evidence from systematic reviews assessing the impact of person-centred care interventions on patient safety.

DESIGN

A three-step review process included a preliminary review of literature, a comprehensive search, and manual searching of reference lists and forward citations of selected reviews. The review protocol was registered with Prospero (CRD42018090048).

DATA SOURCES

Reviewers searched 10 databases for systematic reviews published in English-language peer-reviewed journals between 2000 and 2019: Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, JBI Database, Medline, ProQuest Health & Medicine, PROSPERO Register, PubMed and Scopus.

REVIEW METHODS

Covidence software was used to manage screening and eligibility. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, reviewed full texts of articles for eligibility, and appraised the quality of reviews using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses.

RESULTS

From an initial total of 3412 potential titles, 16 reviews met the inclusion criteria. The selected reviews examined the impact of person-centred care for diverse groups of patients (children, adults and older people) in varied settings. Most systematic reviews assessed experimental studies, generally comparing person-centred interventions with 'usual care', often demonstrating limited evidence of impact on safety. Reviews addressed several patient safety outcomes relevant to nursing, including falls, infections, medication use and misuse, and mortality rates. The systematic reviews were generally well conducted, although several included studies of poor or fair quality. Given the heterogeneity of the interventions, outcomes and research designs of studies included in the selected reviews, we were unable to draw unequivocal conclusions about the implications of person-centred care for patient safety in this umbrella review. However, there was some encouraging evidence that person-centred care initiatives may result in reduced rates of falls (in acute care and residential aged care settings). The review also highlighted reductions in agitation for people with dementia and some improvement in anti-psychotic medication use in older people with dementia.

CONCLUSIONS

Although abundant evidence exists demonstrating the positive effects of person-centred care on healthcare quality and on patient (and provider) wellbeing, there is little research focussing specifically on the impact of person-centred care on patient safety. Thus, there is scope for further high-quality nursing research into how person-centred interventions improve specific patient safety outcomes in order to inform more widespread adoption of person-centred practice.

Designing an electronic blood-borne virus risk alert to improve uptake of testing

The primary aim of the current study was to test the effect of the presentation design of a test alert system on healthcare workers’ (HCWs’) decision-making regarding blood-borne virus (BBV) testing. The secondary aim was to determine HCWs’ acceptance of the system. An online survey used a within-subjects research design with four design factors as independent variables. The dependent variable was clinical decision. Ten realistic descriptions of hypothetical patients were presented to participants who were asked to decide whether to request BBV testing. The effect of a pre-set course of action to request BBV testing was significant when additional information (cost-effectiveness, date of last BBV test or risk assessment) was not presented, with a 16% increase from 30 to 46% accept decisions. When risk assessment information was presented without a pre-set course of action, the effects of cost-effectiveness (27% increase) and last test date (23% decrease) were significant. The main reason for declining to test was insufficient risk. HCWs’ acceptance of the test alert system was high and resistance was low. We make recommendations from the results for the design of a subsequent real-world trial of the test alert system.

Experiences of shared decision-making in community rehabilitation: a focused ethnography

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) can advance patient satisfaction, understanding, goal fulfilment, and patient-reported outcomes. We lack clarity on whether this physician-focused literature applies to community rehabilitation, and on the integration of SDM policies in healthcare settings. We aimed to understand patient and provider perceptions of shared decision-making (SDM) in community rehabilitation, particularly the barriers and facilitators to SDM.

METHODS

We used a focused ethnography involving 14 community rehabilitation sites across Alberta, including rural, regional-urban and metropolitan-urban sites. We conducted semi-structured interviews that asked participants about their positive and negative communication experiences (n = 23 patients; n = 26 providers).

RESULTS

We found SDM experiences fluctuated between extremes: Getting Patient Buy-In and Aligning Expectations. The former is provider-driven, prescriptive and less flexible; the latter is collaborative, inquisitive and empowering. In Aligning Expectations, patients and providers express humility and openness, communicate in the language of ask and listen, and view education as empowering. Patients and providers described barriers and facilitators to SDM in community rehabilitation. Facilitators included geography influencing context and connections; consistent, patient-specific messaging; patient lifestyle, capacity and perceived outlook; provider confidence, experience and perceived independence; provider training; and perceptions of more time (and control over time) for appointments. SDM barriers included lack of privacy; waitlists and financial barriers to access; provider approach; how choices are framed; and, patient's perceived assertiveness, lack of capacity, and level of deference.

CONCLUSIONS

We have found both excellent experiences and areas for improvement for applying SDM in community rehabilitation. We proffer recommendations to advance high-quality SDM in community rehabilitation based on promoting facilitators and overcoming barriers. This research will support the spread, scale and evaluation of a new Model of Care in rehabilitation by the provincial health system, which aimed to promote patient-centred care.

Speech and language therapy for management of chronic cough

BACKGROUND

Cough both protects and clears the airway. Cough has three phases: breathing in (inspiration), closure of the glottis, and a forced expiratory effort. Chronic cough has a negative, far-reaching impact on quality of life. Few effective medical treatments for individuals with unexplained (idiopathic/refractory) chronic cough (UCC) are known. For this group, current guidelines advocate the use of gabapentin. Speech and language therapy (SLT) has been considered as a non-pharmacological option for managing UCC without the risks and side effects associated with pharmacological agents, and this review considers the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of SLT in this context.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of speech and language therapy for treatment of people with unexplained (idiopathic/refractory) chronic cough.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, trials registries, and reference lists of included studies. Our most recent search was 8 February 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs in which participants had a diagnosis of UCC having undergone a full diagnostic workup to exclude an underlying cause, as per published guidelines or local protocols, and where the intervention included speech and language therapy techniques for UCC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of 94 records. Two clinical trials, represented in 10 study reports, met our predefined inclusion criteria. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias for each study and extracted outcome data. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs), and continuous data as mean differences (MDs) or geometric mean differences. We used standard methods recommended by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and serious adverse events (SAEs).

MAIN RESULTS

We found two studies involving 162 adults that met our inclusion criteria. Neither of the two studies included children. The duration of treatment and length of sessions varied between studies from four sessions delivered weekly, to four sessions over two months. Similarly, length of sessions varied slightly from one 60-minute session and three 45-minute sessions to four 30-minute sessions. The control interventions were healthy lifestyle advice in both studies.One study contributed HRQoL data, using the Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ), and we judged the quality of the evidence to be low using the GRADE approach. Data were reported as between-group difference from baseline to four weeks (MD 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21 to 2.85; participants = 71), revealing a statistically significant benefit for people receiving a physiotherapy and speech and language therapy intervention (PSALTI) versus control. However, the difference between PSALTI and control was not observed between week four and three months. The same study provided information on SAEs, and there were no SAEs in either the PSALTI or control arms. Using the GRADE approach we judged the quality of evidence for this outcome to be low.Data were also available for our prespecified secondary outcomes. In each case data were provided by only one study, therefore there were no opportunities for aggregation; we judged the quality of this evidence to be low for each outcome. A significant difference favouring therapy was demonstrated for: objective cough counts (ratio for mean coughs per hour on treatment was 59% (95% CI 37% to 95%) relative to control; participants = 71); symptom score (MD 9.80, 95% CI 4.50 to 15.10; participants = 87); and clinical improvement as defined by trialists (OR 48.13, 95% CI 13.53 to 171.25; participants = 87). There was no significant difference between therapy and control regarding subjective measures of cough (MD on visual analogue scale of cough severity: -9.72, 95% CI -20.80 to 1.36; participants = 71) and cough reflex sensitivity (capsaicin concentration to induce five coughs: 1.11 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.54; participants = 49) times higher on treatment than on control). One study reported data on adverse events, and there were no adverse events reported in either the therapy or control arms of the study.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The paucity of data in this review highlights the need for more controlled trial data examining the efficacy of SLT interventions in the management of UCC. Although a large number of studies were found in the initial search as per protocol, we could include only two studies in the review. In addition, this review highlights that endpoints vary between published studies.The improvements in HRQoL (LCQ) and reduction in 24-hour cough frequency seen with the PSALTI intervention were statistically significant but short-lived, with the between-group difference lasting up to four weeks only. Further studies are required to replicate these findings and to investigate the effects of SLT interventions over time. It is clear that SLT interventions vary between studies. Further research is needed to understand which aspects of SLT interventions are most effective in reducing cough (both objective cough frequency and subjective measures of cough) and improving HRQoL. We consider these endpoints to be clinically important. It is also important for future studies to report information on adverse events.Because of the paucity of data, we can draw no robust conclusions regarding the efficacy of SLT interventions for improving outcomes in unexplained chronic cough. Our review identifies the need for further high-quality research, with comparable endpoints to inform robust conclusions.

Individualized decision aid for diverse women with lupus nephritis (IDEA-WON): A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment decision-making regarding immunosuppressive therapy is challenging for individuals with lupus. We assessed the effectiveness of a decision aid for immunosuppressive therapy in lupus nephritis.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

In a United States multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial (RCT), adult women with lupus nephritis, mostly from racial/ethnic minority backgrounds with low socioeconomic status (SES), seen in in- or outpatient settings, were randomized to an individualized, culturally tailored, computerized decision aid versus American College of Rheumatology (ACR) lupus pamphlet (1:1 ratio), using computer-generated randomization. We hypothesized that the co-primary outcomes of decisional conflict and informed choice regarding immunosuppressive medications would improve more in the decision aid group. Of 301 randomized women, 298 were analyzed; 47% were African-American, 26% Hispanic, and 15% white. Mean age (standard deviation [SD]) was 37 (12) years, 57% had annual income of <$40,000, and 36% had a high school education or less. Compared with the provision of the ACR lupus pamphlet (n = 147), participants randomized to the decision aid (n = 151) had (1) a clinically meaningful and statistically significant reduction in decisional conflict, 21.8 (standard error [SE], 2.5) versus 12.7 (SE, 2.0; p = 0.005) and (2) no difference in informed choice in the main analysis, 41% versus 31% (p = 0.08), but clinically meaningful and statistically significant difference in sensitivity analysis (net values for immunosuppressives positive [in favor] versus negative [against]), 50% versus 35% (p = 0.006). Unresolved decisional conflict was lower in the decision aid versus pamphlet groups, 22% versus 44% (p < 0.001). Significantly more patients in the decision aid versus pamphlet group rated information to be excellent for understanding lupus nephritis (49% versus 33%), risk factors (43% versus 27%), medication options (50% versus 33%; p ≤ 0.003 for all); and the ease of use of materials was higher in the decision aid versus pamphlet groups (51% versus 38%; p = 0.006). Key study limitations were the exclusion of men, short follow-up, and the lack of clinical outcomes, including medication adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

An individualized decision aid was more effective than usual care in reducing decisional conflict for choice of immunosuppressive medications in women with lupus nephritis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02319525.

Shared decision-making in the BREATHE asthma intervention trial: A research protocol

AIM

To evaluate the preliminary effectiveness of the BRief Evaluation of Asthma THerapy intervention, a 7-min primary care provider-delivered shared decision-making protocol that uses motivational interviewing to address erroneous asthma disease and medication beliefs.

DESIGN

A multi-centre masked two-arm group-randomized clinical trial.

METHODS

This 2-year pilot study is funded (September 2016) by the National Institute of Nursing Research. Eight providers will be randomized to one of two arms: the active intervention (N = 4) or a dose-matched attention control (N = 4). Providers will deliver the intervention to which they were randomized to 10 Black adult patients with uncontrolled asthma (N = 80). Patients will be followed three months postintervention to test the preliminary intervention effects on asthma control (primary outcome) and on medication adherence, lung function, and asthma-related quality of life (secondary outcomes).

DISCUSSION

This study will evaluate the preliminary impact of a novel shared decision-making intervention delivered in a real world setting to address erroneous disease and medication beliefs as a means of improving asthma control in Black adults. Results will inform a future, large-scale randomized trial with sufficient power to test the intervention's effectiveness.

IMPACT

Shared decision-making is an evidence-based intervention with proven effectiveness when implemented in the context of labour- and time-intensive research protocols. Medication adherence is linked with the marked disparities evident in poor and minority adults with asthma. Addressing this requires a novel multifactorial approach as we have proposed. To ensure sustainability, shared decision-making interventions must be adapted to and integrated into real-world settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at clincialtrials.gov as NCT03036267 and NCT03300752.

Could shared decision making affect staying in hospital? A cross-sectional pilot study

Background

Shared Decision Making (SDM) is an approach where clinicians and patients share the best available evidence to make decision and where patients opinions are considered. This approach provides benefits for patients, clinicians and health care system. The aim of the present study is to investigate the patients’ perception of their participation in treatment choices and to identify the possible influences of variables in decision aids and therapeutic choices. Furthermore the present study evaluates the impact of SDM on the length of hospital stay and the health expenditure in Piemonte, an Italian region.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was performed in 2016. The patients were selected after hospitalization to clinical and surgical units at the Rivoli and Susa Hospital. Data were collected through the questionnaire and the Hospital Discharge Registers. STROBE guidelines for observational studies were used. A descriptive analysis was conducted. Frequencies and percentages of the categorical variables were reported. Statistical analyses were performed using t-test, chi-square test and Mann-Whitney test.

Results

The final sample was made of 174 subjects. More than half of the sample reported a SDM approach. Female gender (p = 0.027) and lower age (p = 0.047) are associated with an increased possibility to report SDM. Receiving “good” or “excellent” information, having their own request fulfilled and their opinions took into account by healthcare professionals, were all found to be predictors for an approach recognized as SDM (p ≤ 0.05). The perception that healthcare professionals spent a proper amount of time with the patients and used an understendable language are factors increase the chance of a “shared” decision process (p ≤ 0.05). The patients trust in the information given by the healthcare professional is not affecting their perception about the decision making process (P = 0.195). No significant difference where recorded in length of stay and hospital expenditure.

Conclusions

The data show the role played by different dimension of the patients-clinician relationship and that the strongest determinant of a perceived shared decision making approach are healthcare professional-depending.

Impact of Shared Decision Making on Disease-Modifying Drug Adherence in Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) and adherence to treatment are an integral part of multiple sclerosis (MS) care. A collaborative process, SDM actively involves the patient, the health care provider, and an extended network in making treatment decisions. Adherence to disease-modifying drug therapies in patients with MS presents an ongoing challenge for patients and health care providers due to the chronic nature of this disease. This narrative review aims to explore the impact of SDM on adherence based on existing literature and to identify new approaches to optimizing adherence.

METHODS

A search was conducted using medical subject heading terms, including decision-making, adherence, shared decision-making, compliance, and patient-centered care.

RESULTS

Shared decision making between patients and clinicians promotes adherence to the treatment plan in MS. A proactive SDM approach is based on patient preferences, education, and engagement. Providing credible and accurate sources of information is essential for improving patient engagement. Home monitoring, computerized models, and active patient engagement are a few new approaches to improve adherence in patients with MS.

CONCLUSIONS

Shared decision-making interventions can have a positive effect on patient adherence to disease-modifying drug therapy in MS care. A range of new strategies is emerging that may help promote optimal disease management.

Shared decision making between patient and GP about referrals from primary care: Does gatekeeping make a difference?

Primary care faces challenging times in many countries, mainly caused by an ageing population. The GPs’ role to match patients’ demand with medical need becomes increasingly complex with the growing multiple conditions population. Shared decision-making (SDM) is recognized as ideal to the treatment decision making process. Understanding GPs’ perception on SDM about patient referrals and whether patients’ preferences are considered, becomes increasingly important for improving health outcomes and patient satisfaction. This study aims to 1) understand whether countries vary in how GPs perceive SDM, in patients’ referral, 2) describe to what extent SDM in GPs’ referrals differ between gatekeeping and non-gatekeeping systems, and 3) identify what factors GPs consider when referring to specialists and describing how this differs between gatekeeping and non-gatekeeping systems. Data were collected between October 2011 and December 2013 in 32 countries through the QUALICOPC study (Quality and Costs of Primary Care in Europe). The first question was answered by assessing GPs’ perception on who takes the referral decision. For the second question, a multilevel logistic model was applied. For the third question we analysed the GPs’ responses on what patient logistics and need arguments they consider in the referral process. We found: 1) variation in GPs reported SDM– 90% to 35%, 2) a negative correlation between gatekeeper systems and SDM—however, some countries strongly deviate and 3) GPs in gatekeeper systems more often consider patient interests, whereas in non-gatekeeping countries the GP’s value more own experience with specialists and benchmarking information. Our findings imply that GPs in gatekeeper systems seem to be less inclined to SDM than GPs in a non-gatekeeping system. The relation between gatekeeping/non-gatekeeping and SDM is not straightforward. A more contextualized approach is needed to understand the relation between gatekeeping as a system design feature and its relation with and/or impact on SDM.

Shared decision-making for people with asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects the airways and is common in both adults and children. It is characterised by symptoms including wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness, and cough. People with asthma may be helped to manage their condition through shared decision-making (SDM). SDM involves at least two participants (the medical practitioner and the patient) and mutual sharing of information, including the patient's values and preferences, to build consensus about favoured treatment that culminates in an agreed action. Effective self-management is particularly important for people with asthma, and SDM may improve clinical outcomes and quality of life by educating patients and empowering them to be actively involved in their own health.

OBJECTIVES

To assess benefits and potential harms of shared decision-making for adults and children with asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, which contains studies identified in several sources including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. We also searched clinical trials registries and checked the reference lists of included studies. We conducted the most recent searches on 29 November 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies of individual or cluster parallel randomised controlled design conducted to compare an SDM intervention for adults and children with asthma versus a control intervention. We included studies available as full-text reports, those published as abstracts only, and unpublished data, and we placed no restrictions on place, date, or language of publication. We included interventions targeting healthcare professionals or patients, their families or care-givers, or both. We included studies that compared the intervention versus usual care or a minimal control intervention, and those that compared an SDM intervention against another active intervention. We excluded studies of interventions that involved multiple components other than the SDM intervention unless the control group also received these interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened searches, extracted data from included studies, and assessed risk of bias. Primary outcomes were asthma-related quality of life, patient/parent satisfaction, and medication adherence. Secondary outcomes included exacerbations of asthma, asthma control, acceptability/feasibility from the perspective of healthcare professionals, and all adverse events. We graded and presented evidence in a 'Summary of findings' table.We were unable to pool any of the extracted outcome data owing to clinical and methodological heterogeneity but presented findings in forest plots when possible. We narratively described skewed data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies that compared SDM versus control and included a total of 1342 participants. Three studies recruited children with asthma and their care-givers, and one recruited adults with asthma. Three studies took place in the United States, and one in the Netherlands. Trial duration was between 6 and 24 months. One trial delivered the SDM intervention to the medical practitioner, and three trials delivered the SDM intervention directly to the participant. Two paediatric studies involved use of an online portal, followed by face-to-face consultations. One study delivered an SDM intervention or a clinical decision-making intervention through a mixture of face-to-face consultations and telephone calls. The final study randomised paediatric general practice physicians to receive a seminar programme promoting application of SDM principles. All trials were open-label, although one study, which delivered the intervention to physicians, stated that participants were unaware of their physicians' involvement in the trial. We had concerns about selection and attrition bias and selective reporting, and we noted that one study substantially under-recruited participants. The four included studies used different approaches to measure fidelity/intervention adherence and to report study findings.One study involving adults with poorly controlled asthma reported improved quality of life (QOL) for the SDM group compared with the control group, using the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) for assessment (mean difference (MD) 1.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24 to 2.91), but two other trials did not identify a benefit. Patient/parent satisfaction with the performance of paediatricians was greater in the SDM group in one trial involving children. Medication adherence was better in the SDM group in two studies - one involving adults and one involving children (all medication adherence: MD 0.21, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.31; mean number of controlled medication prescriptions over 26 weeks: 1.1 in the SDM group (n = 26) and 0.7 in the control group (n = 27)). In one study, asthma-related visit rates were lower in the SDM group than in the usual care group (1.0/y vs 1.4/y; P = 0.016), but two other studies did not report a difference in exacerbations nor in prescriptions for short courses of oral steroids. Finally, one study described better odds of reporting no asthma problems in the SDM group than in the usual care group (odds ratio (OR) 1.90, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.87), although two other studies reporting asthma control did not identify a benefit with SDM. We found no information about acceptability of the intervention to the healthcare professional and no information on adverse events. Overall, our confidence in study results ranged from very low to moderate, and we downgraded outcomes owing to risk of bias, imprecision, and indirectness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Substantial differences between the four included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) indicate that we cannot provide meaningful overall conclusions. Individual studies demonstrated some benefits of SDM over control, in terms of quality of life; patient and parent satisfaction; adherence to prescribed medication; reduction in asthma-related healthcare visits; and improved asthma control. Our confidence in the findings of these individual studies ranges from moderate to very low, and it is important to note that studies did not measure or report adverse events.Future trials should be adequately powered and of sufficient duration to detect differences in patient-important outcomes such as exacerbations and hospitalisations. Use of core asthma outcomes and validated scales when possible would facilitate future meta-analysis. Studies conducted in lower-income settings and including an economic evaluation would be of interest. Investigators should systematically record adverse events, even if none are anticipated. Studies identified to date have not included adolescents; future trials should consider their inclusion. Measuring and reporting of intervention fidelity is also recommended.