"I think that everybody should be involved": What informs experiences of shared decision-making in supporting people living with schizophrenia spectrum disorders?

Experiences of Clients and Professionals with the Recovery Oriented Intake

The Recovery Oriented Intake (ROI) integrates recovery principles from the start of treatment, and involves peer experts, unlike the intake as usual (IAU). This study compared experiences with ROI and IAU among 127 clients and 391 professionals, consisting of practitioners and peer experts. Intake's quality, measured with questionnaires, showed no differences in experiences between ROI and IAU clients. However, practitioners experienced ROI as more recovery-oriented than IAU. The ROI Fidelity Check (RFC) revealed that clients' RFC-scores, but not practitioners', predicted their valuation of intake's quality. This underscores the need for (re)training and peer supervision for professionals to ensure adherence to ROI's principles. Discrepancies between clients' and professionals' experiences at the start of treatment are consistent with literature on working alliance and Shared Decision Making (SDM). Differences between ROI and IAU professionals may stem from heightened awareness of recovery principles due to training and the presence of peer experts during intake.

Family Involvement in Routine Services for Individuals With Severe Mental Illness: Scoping Review of Barriers and Strategies

OBJECTIVE

The authors investigated barriers to practices that promote family involvement in mental health services, focusing on individuals with severe mental illness, their families, and mental health providers. Additionally, the authors sought to identify strategies to facilitate family involvement in mental health provision to highlight the engagement process in routine practice and propose future directions for organizations to establish a family-friendly environment.

METHODS

Systematic searches for literature published from January 1990 to March 2023 were conducted in PsycInfo, PubMed, CINAHL, Sociological Abstracts, and Scopus databases. Gray literature searches and backward and forward snowballing strategies were also used.

RESULTS

Forty-six articles were reviewed, revealing contextual backgrounds and engagement practices that hindered family involvement. Inconsistencies in family involvement stemmed from organizational culture, societal attitudes, and providers' negating of family expertise. Uncertainty regarding confidentiality policies and the absence of practice guidelines posed challenges for providers. Negative experiences of families within the mental health system along with variable commitment also hampered involvement. Some service users declined family involvement because of privacy concerns and differing expectations regarding the extent of involvement. Promoting a shared culture of family work, integrating practice standards, and engaging in professional development activities emerged as key strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

A gap exists between implementing policies and practices for family involvement in mental health treatment. Without cultural and organizational shifts in support of working with families, the uptake of family involvement practices will remain inadequate. Each stakeholder has different perceptions of the barriers to family involvement, and family involvement will remain elusive without a shared agreement on its importance.

Shared decision making and associated factors among patients with psychotic disorders: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making is a process where patients and clinicians collaborate to make treatment choices based on the patients' preferences and best available evidence. The implementation of shared decision making remains limited for patients with psychotic disorders despite being recommended at policy level, being advocated as ethical right and wanted by the patient's. A barrier to implementation that is often mentioned is reduced decision-making capacity among patients. The challenges of implementing shared decision making highlights a need for more knowledge on shared decision making for these patients. Moreover, the association between patient-related characteristics and shared decision making is unclear, and further research have been suggested. More knowledge of factors associated with involvement in shared decision making can enhance understanding and help to empower patients in the decision-making process. The current study examined the extent of reported shared decision making among patients with a psychotic disorder in mental health care and factors associated with shared decision making.

METHODS

This study included 305 participants with a psychotic disorder from 39 clinical inpatient and outpatient sites across Norway. Shared decision making was assessed using the CollaboRATE survey. A linear mixed model was estimated to assess characteristics associated with shared decision making scores.

RESULTS

The CollaboRATE mean score was 6.3 (ranging from 0 to 9), the top score was 14.1% and increased global satisfaction with services was significantly associated with a higher level of shared decision making (regression coefficient 0.27, 95% confidence interval (0.23; 0.32), p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The low top score shows that few patients felt that they received the highest possible quality of shared decision making, indicating that many patients found room for improvement. This suggests that services for patients with psychotic disorders should be designed to give them a greater role in decision making. Shared decision making might play a key role in mental health care, ensuring that patients with psychotic disorders are satisfied with the services provided.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03271242, date of registration: 5 Sept. 2017.

The role of pharmacists in supporting service users to optimise antipsychotic medication

Pharmacists have a contribution to make in improving optimising medication use for people on antipsychotic medication. The rates of prescribing antipsychotics have increased in England with an 18% rise from 2015 to 2020. People on antipsychotic medication are not treated as equal partners in conversations about their medications. This can leave people to make decisions about their antipsychotic medications without input from their prescribers which can have significant consequences for individuals. Involving people in the decision-making process, as experts on their own condition, has the potential to improve treatment outcomes. The evidence suggests that involving pharmacists in supporting people with serious mental illnesses will lead to improved clinical outcomes. Key areas for pharmacist involvement are providing information, education and counselling on antipsychotic medication and the side effects and reducing polypharmacy especially when antipsychotics are prescribed off license.

Pregnant persons and birth partners' experiences of shared decision-making during pregnancy and childbirth: An umbrella review

OBJECTIVES

This umbrella review aimed to summarize evidence on pregnant persons and/or their birth partners' experiences and expectations of SDM during pregnancy and childbirth.

METHODS

We searched eight databases from 2011 to 2023. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods systematic reviews were included in this review.

RESULTS

We have identified 26 reviews that report on 622 primary studies involving over 213,000 pregnant persons and 22,000 birth partners, examining a broad range of decision-making scenarios in maternity care. The three-talk model was used to categorise the themes which include communication, weighing options, and making a decision. Multiple reviews have reported that pregnant persons and birth partners have mixed experiences in several decision-making scenarios, with insufficient information and inadequate consideration or answers to their questions being common issues. Pregnant persons and birth partners prefer clear explanations, simple communication, and involvement in decision-making. Exclusion from the decision-making during pregnancy and childbirth may lead to negative experiences, whilst involvement improves satisfaction, reduces distress and fosters empowerment.

CONCLUSIONS

The review highlights the importance of promoting SDM in maternity care, as it is fundamental to promoting maternal, newborn, and family well-being.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Health systems should redesign antenatal classes and train healthcare providers to enhance communication skills and encourage informed decision-making by pregnant persons and birth partners.

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.

What does shared decision making ask from doctors? Uncovering suppressed qualities that could improve person-centered care

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision making (SDM) is infrequently seen in clinical practice despite four decades of efforts. We propose a need to explore what SDM asks from doctors in terms of enabling competencies and necessary, underlying qualities, and how these can be nurtured or suppressed in medical training.

DISCUSSION

Key SDM tasks call for doctors to understand communication and decision mechanisms to carry them out well, including reflecting on what they know and do not know, considering what to say and how, and listening unprejudiced to patients. Different doctor qualities can support accomplishing these tasks; humility, flexibility, honesty, fairness, self-regulation, curiosity, compassion, judgment, creativity, and courage, all relevant to deliberation and decision making. Patient deference to doctors, lack of supervised training opportunities with professional feedback, and high demands in the work environment may all inflate the risk of only superficially involving patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified ten professional qualities and related competencies required for SDM, with each to be selected based on the specific situation. The competencies and qualities need to be preserved and nurtured during doctor identity building, to bridge the gap between knowledge, technical skills, and authentic efforts to achieve SDM.

Shared decision making with schizophrenic patients: a randomized controlled clinical trial with booster sessions (DECIDE Study)

BACKGROUND

The treatment of schizophrenia requires a prolonged, multidimensional intervention that includes antipsychotic drugs. Treatment adherence is essential to effectively control the disorder. Shared decision-making (SDM) is a strategy, supported by numerous practical and ethical arguments, that seeks to involve patients in the therapeutic process to improve treatment adherence and satisfaction. The use of this model in mental health has been limited for many intrinsic and extrinsic reasons. The results of clinical trials conducted to date have largely been disappointing, potential due to study design-related limitations.

AIM/QUESTION

To evaluate the efficacy, in terms of treatment adherence and improvement in clinical variables, such as severity of symptoms, days of hospitalization or insight, of a carefully timed SDM model initiated immediately prior to hospital discharge in patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Single-blind, randomized clinical trial in an acute psychiatric care unit within the Andalusian Health Department to compare SDM (experimental group) to treatment as usual (TAU; control group) in a sample of patients hospitalized for an acute episode of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The study was performed between January 2014 and June 2017. The experimental group participated in SDM sessions prior to discharge with regular booster sessions over the one-year follow-up. The health care team responsible for SDM was predisposed to concordance (LatCon II scale) and received specific training in SDM. A hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate the factors independently associated with adherence, controlling for sociodemographic, clinical, and admission-related variables. Variables were assessed at admission, discharge and at 3, 6 and 12 months after discharge during the one year follow up. BARS, DAI, WAI-S, COMRADE and PANSS were used to evaluate adherence, attitude to treatment, therapeutic alliance, satisfaction and confidence with decision and clinical status, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 227 schizophrenic patients hospitalized with acute decompensation were evaluated; of these, 102 met all inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Most patients (95%) had prior experience with antipsychotics and most (82%) had experienced related side effects. Despite randomization, psychopathologic severity was greater in the experimental group, with a mean (SD) PANSS score of 104.08 (80) vs. 93.45 (20.30) (p < 0.05). The final regression model to explain adherence was significant (adjusted R2 = 0.384; F [df= 6] = 4.386; p < 0.001), with a direct, significant and independent association with SDM mediated by the number of booster sessions.

DISCUSSION

Shared decision making with booster sessions appears to increase treatment adherence in patients with severe mental disorders.

IMPLICATION ON PRACTICE

Ethical, practical, and clinical reasons support the use of strategies designed promote the use of long-term, shared decision-making in psychiatric patients, especially in schizophrenia spectrum disorder.

"It's That They Treated Me Like an Object": A Qualitative Study on the Participation of People Diagnosed with Psychotic Disorders in Their Health Care

The mental health recovery model is based on shared decision making, in which patients' preferences and perceptions of the care received are taken into account. However, persons with psychosis usually have very few opportunities to participate in this process. The present study explores the experiences and perceptions of a group of patients with psychosis-in some cases longstanding, in others more recently diagnosed-concerning their participation in the decisions taken about the approach to their condition and about the attention received from healthcare professionals and services. For this purpose, we performed a qualitative analysis of the outcomes derived from five focus groups and six in-depth interviews (36 participants). Two major themes, with five sub-themes, were identified: shared decision-making (drug-centred approach, negotiation process, and lack of information) and the care environment and styles of clinical practice as determinants (aggressive versus person-centred environments, and styles of professional practice). The main conclusions drawn are that users want to participate more in decision making, they want to be offered a range of psychosocial options from the outset and that their treatment should be based on accessibility, humanity and respect. These findings are in line with the guidelines for clinical practice and should be taken into account in the design of care programmes and the organisation of services for persons with psychosis.

Epistemic injustice and the psychiatrist

BACKGROUND

Psychiatrists depend on their patients for clinical information and are obligated to regard them as trustworthy, except in special circumstances. Nevertheless, some critics of psychiatry have argued that psychiatrists frequently perpetrate epistemic injustice against patients. Epistemic injustice is a moral wrong that involves unfairly discriminating against a person with respect to their ability to know things because of personal characteristics like gender or psychiatric diagnosis.

METHODS

We review the concept of epistemic injustice and several claims that psychiatric practice is epistemically unjust.

RESULTS

While acknowledging the risk of epistemic injustice in psychiatry and other medical fields, we argue that most concerns that psychiatric practice is epistemically unjust are unfounded.

CONCLUSIONS

The concept of epistemic injustice does not add significantly to existing standards of good clinical practice, and that it could produce changes in practice that would be deleterious. Psychiatrists should resist calls for changes to clinical practice based on this type of criticism.

Management of schizophrenia in women during the perinatal period: a synthesis of international recommendations

INTRODUCTION

The perinatal period in schizophrenia is associated with high risk of psychotic relapse and pregnancy/child outcomes. The extent to which antipsychotics may potentially affect the fetus or the child development is unclear and debated. Even though guidelines have been developed, there is a lack of consensual recommendations regarding the optimal strategy to manage schizophrenia during the perinatal period.

AREAS COVERED

This systematic review describes the current state of evidence with respect to the impact of recommended interventions for schizophrenia during the perinatal period, including childbearing age, pregnancy and post-partum. It compares recent international treatment guidelines for this specific group of women. Last, this review presents a set of major points to be discussed with patients and relatives for shared-decision making and a summary of key recommendations from the international guidelines.

EXPERT OPINION

Although treatment guidelines may be of significant help, discrepancies exist across them regarding the management of antipsychotics for schizophrenia women during the perinatal period. Shared decision-making and advance directives represent useful patient-centered approaches during this specific period. Further cohort-based evidence is needed to better identify maternal and fetal risks associated to antipsychotic treatment exposure.

Experiences of shared decision making among patients with psychotic disorders in Norway: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is a process where the patient and the health professional collaborate to make decisions based on both the patient's preferences and the best available evidence. Patients with psychotic disorders are less involved in making decisions than they would like. More knowledge of these patients' experiences of SDM may improve implementation. The study aim was to describe and explore experiences of SDM among patients with psychotic disorders in mental health care.

METHODS

Individual interviews were conducted with ten persons with a psychotic disorder. They were service users of two community mental health centres. The transcribed material was analysed using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Four-fifths of the participants in this study found that they received insufficient information about their health situation and treatment options. All participants experienced that only one kind of treatment was often presented, which was usually medication. Although the study found that different degrees of involvement were practised, two thirds of the participants had little impact on choices to be made. This was despite the fact that they wanted to participate and felt capable of participating, even during periods of more severe illness. The participants described how important it was that SDM in psychosis was based on a trusting relationship, but stated that it took time to establish such a relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

This study with ten participants indicates that patients with psychotic disorders experienced that they were not allowed to participate as much as they wanted to and believed they were capable of. Some patients were involved, but to a lesser degree than in SDM. More and better tailored information communicated within a trusting relationship is needed to provide psychotic patients with a better basis for active involvement in decisions about their health care.

Understanding the Treatment Preferences of People Living with Schizophrenia in Australia; A Patient Value Mapping Study

PURPOSE

To examine the treatment and long-term outcome preferences for people living with schizophrenia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-six Australian adults, living with schizophrenia completed a novel online survey with six sections: Demographic characteristics; Disease history; Quality-of-life; Patient support programmes; Discrete Choice Experiment, and Best-Worst Scaling exercise.

RESULTS

Participants indicated that they preferred to be involved in treatment decision with their doctor. A minority of participants reported having been previously involved in a patient support programme (28.8%) and only one in six participants had a National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) package (16.7%) with over a third of participants indicating that they were ineligible (37.9%). Participants' average quality-of-life score was 60%.

CONCLUSION

Recent hospitalisation influenced the relative importance of treatment attributes, with effectiveness on hearing voices being the most important treatment attribute. The most important long-term goals were having a stable place to live, being independent, and physical health. People with schizophrenia care about their long-term functional recovery outcomes, rating symptom control and independence as their highest priority. They want to be part of the treatment conversation with their doctors. Therefore, psychiatrists are encouraged to use shared decision-making to establish the treatment course that best aligns with individuals' long-term goals.

Shared Decision-Making and Role Preference Among Patients With Schizophrenia in Malaysia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction: Shared decision-making (SDM) is recognized as a promising strategy for improving collaboration between clinicians and their patients in achieving recovery. In Malaysia, SDM among people with schizophrenia is still lacking both in practice and in research. This study aimed to determine the level of SDM and role preference and their associated factors among patients with schizophrenia in Malaysia. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 86 outpatient attendees with schizophrenia at a teaching hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The nine-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire and Control Preference Scale were used to assess perceived SDM experience and role preference, respectively. Linear and logistic regression models were used to analyze the factors associated with SDM and role preference, respectively. Factors with a p <0.25 from the simple regression analyses were controlled as the covariates in the multiple regression analyses. Results: The study respondents were predominantly female, single, and unemployed, with a mean age of 44 years. Only 35% of the participants reported having high SDM experiences, even though the majority (56%) preferred autonomous role preference. Among the participants who preferred autonomous roles, only 40% experienced high SDM. High SDM was found to be significantly associated with being younger (B = -0.33, 95% CI = -0.67 to -0.003) and being non-clozapine users (B = 19.90, 95% CI = 9.39-30.41), while autonomous role preference was significantly associated with a lower level of insight [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.72-0.99] and being on oral antipsychotic drugs only (AOR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.10-7.82). Conclusion: The practice of SDM is still lacking in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia in Malaysia, even though many of them preferred to be involved in the decision-making pertaining to their treatment. This study indicates the need for clinicians to improve their patients' involvement in the treatment process. More research is needed on how SDM can be implemented in patients with schizophrenia, especially in Asian population settings.