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

Patient-related characteristics considered to affect patient involvement in shared decision making about treatment: A scoping review of the qualitative literature

OBJECTIVE

To identify patient-related characteristics considered to affect patient involvement in shared decision making (SDM) about treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of qualitative studies. We searched for literature across seven databases until March 2022, and included qualitative studies that focused on associations between patient-related characteristics and SDM about treatment in adults. We analyzed studies using an inductive thematic approach.

RESULTS

The search yielded 5948 articles, of which 70 were included. We identified many different patient-related characteristics, which we grouped into four categories related to: (1) the individual who is facing the decision, (2) the decision, (3) the relationship between the patient and the clinician and others involved in the decision, and (4) the healthcare context.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies report a variety of patient-related characteristics that may affect patient involvement in SDM. Amongst others, patients may need to feel informed, to understand their role in SDM, and be able to communicate. Involvement may be challenging with characteristics such as perceived time pressure, poor patient-clinician relationships, emotional distress, and severe illness.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

In order to truly involve patients in SDM, we might need to focus on characteristics such as patient emotions and relationship building, besides information provision and values clarification.

A New Treatment Program: Focused Integrated Team-based Treatment Program for Bipolar Disorder (FITT-BD)

OBJECTIVE

Bipolar disorder (BD) is complicated by a dynamic, chronic course along with multiple comorbid psychiatric and medical conditions, making it challenging for clinicians to treat and patients to thrive. To efficiently manage the complexity of BD and help patients recover, we developed a Focused Integrated Team-based Treatment Program for Bipolar Disorder (FITT-BD). The purpose of this paper is to describe how we developed this clinic and the lessons we learned.

METHODS

We developed FITT-BD by integrating strategies from stepped care, collaborative care, and learning health care systems. We describe the rationale, details, and lessons learned in developing FITT-BD.

RESULTS

By integrating stepped care, collaborative care, and a learning health care system approach, FITT-BD aims to reduce barriers to care, leverage the expertise of a multidisciplinary treatment team, ensure patient-centeredness, and use assessments to inform and continuously improve outcomes in real time. We learned that there are challenges in the creation of a web-based application that tracks the treatment of patients within a network of hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

The success of FITT-BD will be determined by the degree to which it can increase treatment access, improve treatment adherence, and help individuals with BD achieve their treatment goals. We expect that FITT-BD will improve outcomes in the context of ongoing clinical care.

PUBLIC HEALTH SIGNIFICANCE

The treatment of BD is challenging and complex. We propose a new treatment model for BD: FITT-BD. We expect that this program will be a patient-centered approach that improves outcomes in the context of ongoing clinical care for patients with BD.

Mental health service users' experiences and perspectives of family involvement in their care: a systematic literature review

Background: The importance of engaging families in mental health care is recognised and endorsed by governments worldwide, however service users' perspectives of family involvement are not well understood.Aims: This study sought to summarise the literature regarding how service users view the involvement of family in their engagement with services and care.Methods: A search was conducted within the following databases for manuscripts published in the last 10 years: PsycINFO, CINAHLPlus, PubMed and Scopus. Of the 4251 eligible papers 17 met the inclusion criteria for review and were subjected to quality appraisal using the RATS (relevance, appropriateness, transparency, soundness) qualitative research review guidelines.Results: Thematic analysis identified four primary themes: family involvement can be positive and negative; barriers to family involvement; family involvement is variable; and communication and collaboration among stakeholders.Conclusions: Identifying the barriers to family involvement and heterogeneity among service users' views were key findings of this review. Despite the widely reported benefits of including families in mental health care it does not always occur. A clearer and more nuanced understanding of service users' needs and preferences for family involvement is required.

Provider Perspectives on Implementing Shared Decision Making for PTSD Treatment in VA Primary Care

Shared decision making is an important implementation "pull" strategy for increasing uptake of evidence-based mental health practices. In this qualitative study, we explored provider perspectives on implementing shared decision making at the point of mental health treatment initiation using a publicly available, patient-facing decision support tool for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). We conducted semi-structured interviews with 22 mental health providers (psychiatrists, nurses, psychologists, and social workers) working in one of five VA primary care clinics. Interviewed were analyzed using thematic analysis. Provider were enthusiastic about using decision aids as a source of high quality information that could improve patient experience and confidence in treatment. However, providers had concerns about decision aid accessibility, time constraints to conduct shared decision making in-session, and patient motivation to engage in shared decision making. Providers stated they would prefer to use shared decision making with patients that they felt were most likely to follow through with treatment. While providers believed that shared decision making could improve PTSD treatment planning, they thought it most appropriate for patients with the highest levels of motivation and fewest barriers to care. These beliefs may limit widespread adoption and reflect missed opportunities to reach difficult-to-engage patients.

What Is the Capacity of Individuals with Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder to Make Healthcare Decisions? An Exploratory Study of the Views of Patients, Psychiatrists, and Family Caregivers—A Survey on Decisional Capacity in Mental Health

Background: Research on the decisional capacity of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder patients mostly reflects the hospital context. Aim: To describe the views of patients, psychiatrists, and caregivers on the capacity of individuals with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder to make everyday decisions on their care related to their illness. Methods: A survey was conducted among schizophrenia and bipolar disorder patients, psychiatrists, and caregivers (June 2019 to January 2020; seven countries). A questionnaire was emailed to members of the Global Alliance of Mental Illness of Advocacy Network—Europe (GAMIAN; patients) and the European Federation of Families of People with Mental Illness (EUFAMI; caregivers) and to psychiatrists who voluntarily agreed to participate. Questions referred to patients’ involvement and capacity for healthcare decision making, and to barriers to and opportunities for autonomous decision making. Frequency, agreement, and importance were rated on Likert scales. Descriptive statistics were conducted. Results: 21 schizophrenia or bipolar disorder patients (52.3% female; mean age (years) ± SD: 50.71 ± 12.02), 11 psychiatrists (18.2% female), and 15 caregivers (86.6% female; 100% family related) participated in the survey. In total, 86% of patients felt frequently involved in decisions about everyday care and medications, and 91% of psychiatrists and 40% of caregivers perceived the same; 38% of patients felt frequently involved in decisions about the use of acute symptom medications, and 57% on care planning, and 55% and 82% of psychiatrists, and 40% and 53% of caregivers, respectively, believed the same; and 86% of patients, 91% of psychiatrists, and 47% of caregivers agreed on the capacity of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder patients to value the implications of taking medicines to prevent acute psychotic crises. Poor understanding and training are barriers, while advocacy and increasing interest in patients’ needs are opportunities for increasing autonomous decision making. Conclusions: Stakeholders concur that schizophrenia and bipolar disorder patients have the capacity to make everyday decisions around their care related to their illness, including acute symptom management. Barriers and opportunities exist to foster autonomous decisions among mental illness individuals.

Improving treatment decision-making in bipolar II disorder: a phase II randomised controlled trial of an online patient decision-aid

BACKGROUND

Many patients with bipolar II disorder (BPII) prefer to be more informed and involved in their treatment decision-making than they currently are. Limited knowledge and involvement in one's treatment is also likely to compromise optimal BPII management. This Phase II RCT aimed to evaluate the acceptability, feasibility, and safety of a world-first patient decision-aid website (e-DA) to improve treatment decision-making regarding options for relapse prevention in BPII. The e-DA's potential efficacy in terms of improving quality of the decision-making process and quality of the decision made was also explored.

METHODS

The e-DA was based on International Patient Decision-Aid Standards and developed via an iterative co-design process. Adults with BPII diagnosis (n = 352) were recruited through a specialist outpatient clinical service and the social media of leading mental health organisations. Participants were randomised (1:1) to receive standard information with/without the e-DA (Intervention versus Control). At baseline (T0), post-treatment decision (T1) and at 3 months' post-decision follow-up (T2), participants completed a series of validated and purpose-designed questionnaires. Self-report and analytics data assessed the acceptability (e.g., perceived ease-of-use, usefulness; completed by Intervention participants only), safety (i.e., self-reported bipolar and/or anxiety symptoms), and feasibility of using the e-DA (% accessed). For all participants, questionnaires assessed constructs related to quality of the decision-making process (e.g., decisional conflict) and quality of the decision made (e.g., knowledge of treatment options and outcomes).

RESULTS

Intervention participants endorsed the e-DA as acceptable and feasible to use (82.1-94.6% item agreement); most self-reported using the e-DA either selectively (51.8%; relevant sections only) or thoroughly (34%). Exploratory analyses indicated the e-DA's potential efficacy to improve decision-making quality; most between-group standardised mean differences (SMD) were small-to-moderate. The largest potential effects were detected for objective treatment knowledge (- 0.69, 95% CIs - 1.04, - 0.33 at T1; and - 0.57, 95% CIs - 0.99,-0.14 at T2), decisional regret at T2 (0.42, 95% CIs 0.01, 0.84), preparation for decision-making at T1 (- 0.44, 95% CIs - 0.81, - 0.07), and the Decisional Conflict Scale Uncertainty subscale (0.42, 95% CIs 0.08, 0.08) and Total (0.36, 95% CIs 0.30, 0.69) scores, with all SMDs favouring the Intervention over the Control conditions. Regarding safety, e-DA use was not associated with worse bipolar symptoms or anxiety.

CONCLUSION

The e-DA appears to be acceptable, feasible, safe and potentially efficacious at improving patients' decision-making about BPII treatment. Findings also support the future adoption of the e-DA into patient care for BPII to foster treatment decisions based on the best available evidence and patient preferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12617000840381 (prospectively registered 07/06/2017).

20th Anniversary Update of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework Part 1: A Systematic Review of the Decisional Needs of People Making Health or Social Decisions

Background. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) has been used for 20 years to assess and address people’s decisional needs. The evidence regarding ODSF decisional needs has not been synthesized. Objectives. To synthesize evidence from ODSF-based decisional needs studies, identify new decisional needs, and validate current ODSF decisional needs. Methods. A mixed-studies systematic review. Nine electronic databases were searched. Inclusion criteria: studies of people’s decisional needs when making health or social decisions for themselves, a child, or a mentally incapable person, as reported by themselves, families, or practitioners. Two independent authors screened eligibility, extracted data, and quality appraised studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data were analyzed using narrative synthesis. Results. Of 4532 citations, 45 studies from 7 countries were eligible. People’s needs for 101 unique decisions (85 health, 16 social) were reported by 2857 patient decision makers ( n = 36 studies), 92 parent decision makers ( n = 6), 81 family members ( n = 5), and 523 practitioners ( n = 21). Current ODSF decisional needs were reported in 2 to 40 studies. For 6 decisional needs, there were 11 new (manifestations): 1) information (overload, inadequacy regarding others’ experiences with options), 2) difficult decisional roles (practitioner, family involvement, or deliberations), 3) unrealistic expectations (difficulty believing outcome probabilities apply to them), 4) personal needs (religion/spirituality), 5) difficult decision timing (unpredictable), and 6) unreceptive decisional stage (difficulty accepting condition/need for treatment, powerful emotions limiting information processing, lacking motivation to consider delayed/unpredictable decisions). Limitations. Possible publication bias (only peer-reviewed journals included). Possible missed needs (non-ODSF studies, patient decision aid development studies, 3 ODSF needs added in 2006). Conclusion. We validated current decisional needs, identified 11 new manifestations of 6 decisional needs, and recommended ODSF revisions.

Living with bipolar disorder in Chile: A qualitative study

Bipolar disorder (BD) is an important factor contributing to rates of higher morbidity and mortality with serious consequences on the quality of life. There is limited literature on life experience of people living with BD in Chile. For this reason, this study examines the life experiences of Chilean clients with BD. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, and clients aged 40-65 years, euthymic, with a preserved judgement of reality were included. A thematic analysis was conducted, and two themes and subthemes were extracted. The first theme is the life experiences of the disease, and it comprises the subtheme information about BD, life experiences of relapses (with acute experiences of disease, professional assistance, and prodromal symptom management), accepting the disease, accepting the medication, and being bipolar as a stigma. The second theme is that of family environment, which includes the subthemes of family support, lack of family support, and family crisis resulting from BD. The findings provide evidence to support the importance of accepting the disease, the long-term course of the disease, in addition to pharmacological treatment, which requires interventions from nurses when personal risk factors of acute episodes are identified and addressed. Besides, client and family members have to be actively involved. Future research should examine the relationship between stigma from bipolar disorder, perceptions from family members, and educational interventions from nurses and people affected by BD in Chile.

Treatment Attitudes and Adherence Among Patients with Bipolar Disorder: A Systematic Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews about treatment attitudes of patients influencing adherence in bipolar disorder (BD) are rare.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and principles of thematic synthesis. Selectively identified quantitative and qualitative studies were used to examine the attitude-adherence relationship in BD, the types and correlates of treatment attitudes, and the impact of psychosocial interventions on attitudes.

RESULTS

The final list of 163 articles included 114 observational reports (incorporating 21 psychosocial intervention trials), 45 qualitative/descriptive studies, and 4 patient surveys. A positive association between treatment attitudes and adherence was found in most quantitative and qualitative studies, though the strength of the relationship was unclear. Thematic analysis of qualitative studies suggested that patient attitudes influencing adherence were based on perceived advantages and disadvantages of treatment. The principal correlates of patients' attitudes were family attitudes, the clinician-patient alliance, social support, and patients' knowledge of BD. Though negative attitudes such as denial, concerns about adverse treatment consequences, and stigmatizing effects of treatment were common, many patients believed treatment to be beneficial and necessary. The limited data on the effect of psychosocial interventions indicated that treatments selectively targeting attitudes enhanced adherence.

LIMITATIONS

The studies were heterogeneous in design; the quality was uneven (fair to poor); and the risk of bias moderate to high.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite these flaws, awareness of the existing evidence on the attitude-adherence association and other aspects of treatment attitudes in BD can help in efforts to address nonadherence in BD.

Perceptions of shared decision-making in severe mental illness: An integrative review

WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT SHARED DECISION-MAKING?: There is increasing evidence of the positive impact of shared decision-making on health outcomes. There has been little exploration of shared decision-making regarding people diagnosed with serious mental illness from the perspectives of key stakeholders including consumers, families and mental health professionals. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Consumers show variability in the preference for their involvement. Most stakeholders acknowledge the importance of family involvement. MHPs should share the responsibility and right to facilitate consumer involvement. There is bidirectional association between shared decision-making and therapeutic relationships. The practice of shared decision-making is related to multiple factors, and one main perceived barrier is time. The majority of studies are from Western countries. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Elicit consumer preferences and establish a collaborative therapeutic relationship. Encourage and engage families in treatment decision-making. Inter-professional collaboration should be integrated into shared decision-making. It might require lengthier consultation time. Studies in non-Western countries are needed to fully understand the impact of culture on shared decision-making. Abstract Introduction Shared decision-making (SDM) has been broadly advocated in health services and constitutes an important component of patient-centred care and relationship-based care. Aim To review available literature related to perceptions of key stakeholders about shared decision-making in serious mental illness. Method An integrative review was conducted through a search of four online databases from January 2012 to June 2019. Results Forty-six articles were included. Six themes were generated from the data analysis: (a) dynamic preferences for SDM, (b) various stakeholders are rarely involved, (c) SDM is not routinely implemented, (d) multiple facilitators and barriers to SDM, (e) SDM and therapeutic relationships interact, (f) SDM has a promising impact on health outcomes. Discussion Overall, most stakeholders have recognized the importance and flexibility of SDM in serious mental illness, although it is not routine in mental health service. Consumer preferences show variability in their involvement. Most stakeholders acknowledged the importance of family involvement to treatment decision-making. There are several significant challenges to practice SDM. It may require extended consultation times and increasing empirical evidence regarding the SDM outcomes, as well as integrating inter-professional collaboration into SDM. Most studies were conducted in Western culture. Implications for practice Mental health nurses should elicit consumer preferences and establish a collaborative therapeutic relationship. Encourage and engage families in treatment decision-making when consumers prefer their families to be involved. Inter-professional collaboration should be integrated into shared decision-making. The practice of shared decision-making might need extended consultation time and more robust evidence about the outcome of shared decision-making. Studies in non-Western cultures are needed to fully understand cultural issues of shared decision-making.

Phase II Randomised Controlled Trial of a patient decision-aid website to improve treatment decision-making for young adults with bipolar II disorder: A feasibility study protocol

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This paper describes the protocol for a feasibility study for a parallel Phase II randomised control trial (RCT) aiming to evaluate a novel decision-aid website (e-DA) to support young adults with bipolar II disorder (BPII), and their families.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The e-DA was developed according to the International Patient Decision-Aid Standards (IPDAS). Participants will be 40 young adults (18-30 years) referred to a specialist outpatient clinical facility, who have a confirmed clinical diagnosis of BPII. Participants will be randomised (1:1) to receive access to the clinic's online factsheets/website with (Intervention) or without (Control) the e-DA. A series of validated and purpose-designed questionnaires will be administered at baseline (T0), immediately post-decision (T1), and 3 months post-decision (T2). Questionnaires assess key decision-making constructs related to decision-making quality, including: decisional conflict, subjective and objective treatment knowledge, values-based informed choice, concordance between preferred/actual decision-making involvement, preparation for decision-making, and decisional regret. Self-report symptom severity and anxiety will ascertain the safety of e-DA use. The focus of analyses will be to assess effect sizes, in order to guide a future RCT.

DISCUSSION

This feasibility study will evaluate a world first, evidence-based online decision-support resource, a DA website, for young adults with BPII and their families who are deciding on treatment options for relapse prevention. Findings will determine the e-DA's feasibility in RCT procedures (i.e., outpatient clinical setting) and provide estimates of effect sizes on outcomes related to improving treatment decision-making and patient outcomes in a sample of potential end-users, compared to usual care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) - ACTRN12617000840381.

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.

The perspectives of patients with lithium-induced end-stage renal disease

BACKGROUND

Lithium is the treatment of choice for patients suffering from bipolar disorder (BD) but prolonged use induces renal dysfunction in at least 20% of patient. Intensive monitoring of kidney functioning helps to reveal early decline in renal failure. This study investigates the views and experiences of BD patients who have developed end-stage renal disease and were receiving renal replacement therapy.

RESULTS

The patients overall reported not to have been offered alternative treatment options at the start of lithium therapy or when renal functions deteriorated. All indicated to have lacked sound information and dialogue in accordance with shared decision making. Kidney monitoring was inadequate in many cases and decision making rushed.

CONCLUSIONS

Retrospectively, the treatment and monitoring of lithium and the information process were inadequate in many cases. We give suggestions on how to inform patients taking lithium for their BD timely and adequately on the course of renal function loss in the various stages of their treatment.

Pathways and cost-effectiveness of routine lung cancer inpatient care in rural Anhui, China: a retrospective cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Routine inpatient care (RIC) for patients with cancer forms various pathways of clinical procedures. Although most individual procedures comprising the pathways have been tested via clinical trials, little is known about the collective cost and effectiveness of the pathways as a whole. This study aims at exploring RIC pathways for patients with lung cancer from rural Anhui, China, and their determinants and economic impacts.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study adopts a retrospective cohort design and proceeds in five steps. Step 1 defines the four main categories of study variables, including clinical procedures, direct cost and effectiveness of procedures, and factors affecting use of these procedures and their cost and effectiveness. Step 2 selects a cohort of 5000 patients with lung cancer diagnosed between 1 July 2015 and 30 June 2016 from rural Anhui by clustered random sampling. Step 3 retrieves the records of all the inpatient care episodes due to lung cancer and extracts data about RIC procedures, proximate variables (eg, Karnofsky Performance Status, Lung Function Score) of patient outcomes and related factors (eg, stage of cancer, age, gender), by two independent clinician researchers using a web-based form. Step 4 estimates the direct cost of each of the RIC procedures using micro-costing and collects data about ultimate patient outcomes (survival and progression-free survival) through a follow-up survey of patients and/or their close relatives. Step 5 analyses the data collected and explores pathways of RIC procedures and their relations with patient outcomes, costs, cost:effect ratios, and a whole range of clinical and sociodemographic factors using multivariate regression and path models.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol has been approved by an authorised ethics committee of Anhui Medical University (reference number: 20170312). Findings from the study will be disseminated through conventional academic routes such as peer-reviewed publications and presentations at regional, national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN25595562.