Shared decision making as part of value based care: New U.S. policies challenge our readiness

The influence of MRI-based pelvimetric measurements in mother's choice of delivery in fetal breech position

INTRODUCTION

At term, about 3-4% of all singleton pregnancies present as breech. MRI-based pelvimetry is a valuable tool to support selection of adequate candidates for a trial-of-labor in women expecting term breech babies. Shared decision-making is playing an increasingly important role in obstetrics. Since the divergent existing knowledge of breech term delivery needs to be discussed with the pregnant woman, we examined the influence of MRI results on the shared decision-making process in women with term breech presentation.

METHODS

Between 08/2021 and 12/2022, anamnestic and clinical parameters were collected from singleton pregnancies expecting term breech babies resulting in birth at the Hanover Medical School. After information, written consent and inclusion, clinical parameters, the course of birth and the maternal and fetal outcome were collected retrospectively. 32 women participated in a postpartum questionnaire study on inquiry. The subsequent acquisition of information and the arguments in the decision-making process were determined. In addition, the sense of security and self-determination was asked both before and during birth.

RESULTS

50% of the respondents had not decided for a mode of delivery before having MRI pelvimetry. After imaging and information, about the own pelvic dimensions and predictors for a successful vaginal birth, 80% of this subgroup decided to give birth vaginally. Over 40% of the collective descripted that they made a decision based on the result of MRI pelvimetry. None of the women felt to be insecure after having talked about the MRI results. The elective cesarean section group and the group of those who delivered vaginally were approximately equally highly satisfied with their feeling of self-determination of the birth mode. Overall, the study population had a very positive birth experience. The group of women who had delivered by elective cesarean showed a wider range in their assessment and appeared to perceive the experience more negative than the group of women who had a vaginal birth or emergency cesarean. Fetal and maternal outcomes did not differ between the groups.

DISCUSSION

MRT pelvimetry measurements can be used as a predictor for a successful vaginal breech delivery. The additional information obtained from the MRI measurements can be used in the shared decision-making process to decide more easily on the mode of delivery while improving women's awareness and safety. A balanced education on rare and frequently adverse events of vaginal delivery and cesarean section and patient expectations about labor processes must be taken into account.

Assessing the educational quality of shared decision-making interventions for residents: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Many studies on educational interventions to enhance residents' shared decision-making (SDM) skills show limited improvement in SDM skills and clinical outcomes. One plausible explanation for these suboptimal results is the insufficient emphasis on the educational quality of training interventions.

METHODS

This review evaluates interventions' educational quality using an evaluation framework based on a previous study on effective skills transfer and a well-known SDM model. A systematic review was conducted, searching three databases until December 13, 2022. We assessed study quality by calculating MERSQI scores, examined the levels of study effects based on Kirkpatrick's model, and applied our evaluation framework to assess the interventions' educational quality. Given the heterogeneity among the studies, a meta-analysis was not feasible.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included. Role-play and feedback were common training characteristics (65% and 54% of interventions). Only four studies (15%) met our framework's high educational quality threshold. No correlation was found between MERSQI scores and educational quality.

CONCLUSIONS

This review is a valuable attempt to assess the educational quality of SDM interventions beyond measuring study outcomes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Future evaluation frameworks should consider study results, training characteristics, and training content. Our framework offers a sound basis for such an evaluation framework.

Effects of a shared decision-making implementation programme on patient-centred communication in oncology-Secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There is a need for better implementation of patient-centred (PC) communication and shared decision-making (SDM) in routine cancer care.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess whether a programme to implement SDM in oncology had effects on PC communication in clinical encounters.

DESIGN

This study constitutes a secondary analysis of data derived from an implementation trial applying a stepped wedge design that, among other strategies, incorporated training and coaching to enhance the PC communication skills of physicians.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We analysed audio recordings of clinical encounters collected in three departments of a comprehensive cancer centre in Germany before and after rolling out the implementation programme.

MAIN VARIABLES STUDIED

We assessed the PC communication skills of physicians.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Each recording was rated by two researchers using the German version of the Four Habits Coding Scheme (4HCS), an observer-based measure of PC communication. Interrater reliability of the outcome measure was acceptable but moderate. Demographic data of patients participating in audio recordings were analysed.

METHODS

Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and linear mixed-effects models.

RESULTS

In total, 146 encounters, 74 before and 72 after implementation, were evaluated. The mean age of patients was 57.1 years (SD = 13.8), 70.3% were female, the largest portion of patients had medium formal education (32.4%) and were (self-) employed (37.8%). No statistically significant effect of the implementation programme on the physicians' PC communication skills was found.

DISCUSSION

The results indicate that the investigated programme to implement SDM in oncology, including training and coaching, had no effects on PC communication in clinical encounters. These results are in contrast to other studies that report the effects of specific training or coaching on PC communication. Reasons for the lack of effect include the short duration of our training compared to other studies, limited reliability and moderate interrater reliability of the 4HCS scale, limited reach of the intervention programme as well as the inclusion of physicians regardless of their exposure to the interventions.

CONCLUSION

Further research is needed to develop implementation strategies that improve physicians' PC communication skills.

PATIENT CONTRIBUTION

Data on patients and clinical encounters with patients and physicians were analysed. There was no other patient or public involvement.

Effects and Working Mechanisms of a Multilevel Implementation Program for Applying Shared Decision-Making while Discussing Systemic Treatment in Breast Cancer

Background: Enhancing the application of shared decision-making (SDM) is critical for integrating patient preferences in breast cancer treatment choices. We investigated the effect of an adapted multilevel SDM implementation program in breast cancer care. Methods: Breast cancer patients qualifying for (neo)adjuvant systemic treatment were included in a multicenter before−after study. Consultations were audio recorded between June 2018 and July 2019 and analyzed using the five-item Observing Patient Involvement in Decision-Making (OPTION-5) instrument to score SDM application by clinicians. The Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) was used to rate patients’ perceived SDM level. Consultation duration, decision types, number of options discussed and consultations per patient were monitored. Regression analysis was used to investigate the correlated variables and program components. Results: Mean OPTION-5 scores increased from 33.9 (n = 63) before implementation to 54.3 (n = 49) after implementation (p < 0.001). The SDM-Q-9 scores did not change: 91.1 (n = 51) at baseline versus 88.9 (n = 23) after implementation (p = 0.81). Without increasing consultation time, clinicians discussed more options after implementation. The regression analysis showed that exposure to the implementation program, redistribution of tasks and discussing feedback from consultations was associated with a higher level of SDM. Conclusion: The multilevel program helped clinicians achieve clinically relevant improvement in SDM, especially when it is tailored to (individuals in) teams and includes (e-)training, discussing feedback on consultations and redistribution of tasks.

Lessons learned on the experienced facilitators and barriers of implementing a tailored VBHC model in a Dutch university hospital from a perspective of physicians and nurses

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to obtain insight into experienced facilitators and barriers of implementing a tailored value-based healthcare (VBHC) model in a Dutch university hospital from a perspective of physicians and nurses.

METHOD

A descriptive qualitative study with 12 physicians, nurses and managers of seven different care pathways who were involved in the implementation of a tailored VBHC methodology was conducted. Thematic content analysis was used to analyse the data guided by all factors of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

FINDINGS

The method designed for the implementation of a tailored VBHC methodology was appointed as a structured guide for the process. Throughout the implementation process, leadership and team dynamics were considered as important for the implementation to succeed. Also, sharing experiences with other value teams and the cooperation with external Information Technology (IT) teams in the hospital was mentioned as desirable. The involvement of patients, that is part of the VBHC methodology, was considered useful in the decision-making and improvement of the care process because it gave better insights in topics that are important for patients. The time-consuming nature of the implementation process was named as barrier to the VBHC methodology. On top of that, the shaping of the involvement of patients and the ongoing changes in departments were established as difficult. Finally, working with the Electronic Health Records and acquiring the necessary digital skills were considered to be often forgotten and, thus, hindering implementation.

CONCLUSION

Clinical Healthcare organisations implementing a tailored VBHC methodology will benefit from the use of a structured implementation methodology, a well-led strong team and cooperation with (external) teams and patients. However, shaping patient involvement, alignment with other departments and attention to digitisation were seen as a most important concerns in implementation and require further attention.

Assessing Patient Decision-Making on Biologic and Small-Molecule Therapies in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Insights From a Conjoint Analysis in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

Recent drug approvals have increased the number of therapies available for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), making it difficult for patients to navigate available treatment options. We examined patient decision-making surrounding biologic and small-molecule therapies in an international cohort of patients from the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom using conjoint analysis (CA), a form of tradeoff analysis examining how respondents make complex decisions.

METHODS

We performed a CA survey that quantified the relative importance of therapy attributes (eg, efficacy, adverse effects) in decision-making. Patients with IBD were recruited from the general population and through specialty IBD clinics. We used a hierarchical Bayes analysis to model individual patients' preferences and compared the relative importance of medication attributes between countries and practice settings. Using a series of multivariable linear regression models, we assessed whether demographic and clinical characteristics (eg, IBD subtype, severity) predicted how patients made decisions.

RESULTS

Overall, 1077 patients in 3 countries completed the survey. No differences in the relative importance of medication attributes were observed between the 3 countries' general IBD populations. However, efficacy was more important for patients in the US-based IBD specialty care cohort than for the general IBD population (29% and 23% importance, respectively; P < 0.0001). A few demographic and clinical characteristics were associated with small changes in individual preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large international CA study, patients prioritized efficacy as the most important therapeutic attribute. Decision-making seemed to be highly personalized in that therapeutic preferences were hard to predict based on patient characteristics.

The new strategic agenda for value transformation

The model for value-based healthcare introduced in 2006 by Porter and Teisberg is still relevant, but it is incomplete. Porter and Teisberg put a strong focus on measuring outcomes, but how to use these measurements to actually improve quality of care has not been described. In addition, value-based healthcare as originally introduced neglects that a true shift from volume to patient value requires a change in culture and way of working of healthcare professionals. The original strategic agenda for value transformation (in short: ‘value agenda’) consists of six elements: organize into Integrated Practice Units (1), measure outcomes and costs for every patient (2), move to bundled payments for care cycles (3), integrate care delivery systems (4), expand geographic reach (5), and build an enabling information technology platform (6). For value-based healthcare to become a reality, the strategic agenda needs to be extended with four elements. First, healthcare providers need to set up a systematic approach for value-based quality improvement. Second, value needs to be integrated in patient communication. Third, we should invest in a culture of value delivery. And fourth, we should build learning platforms for healthcare professionals based on patient outcome data. Best practices on value-based healthcare implementation are working on these four elements in addition to the original value agenda. In conclusion, a new strategic agenda for value transformation is proposed that combines the vision of the founders of value-based healthcare with implementation experience in order to support healthcare providers in their shift to become value-based.

"All about the money?" A qualitative interview study examining organizational- and system-level characteristics that promote or hinder shared decision-making in cancer care in the United States

BACKGROUND

Despite decades of ethical, empirical, and policy support, shared decision-making (SDM) has failed to become standard practice in US cancer care. Organizational and health system characteristics appear to contribute to the difficulties in implementing SDM in routine care. However, little is known about the relevance of the different characteristics in specific healthcare settings. The aim of the study was to explore how organizational and health system characteristics affect SDM implementation in US cancer care.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with diverse cancer care stakeholders in the USA. Of the 36 invited, 30 (83%) participants consented to interview. We used conventional content analysis to analyze transcript content.

RESULTS

The dominant theme in the data obtained was that concerns regarding a lack of revenue generation, or indeed, the likely loss of revenue, were a major barrier preventing implementation of SDM. Many other factors were prominent as well, but the view that SDM might impair organizational or individual profit margins and reduce the income of some health professionals was widespread. On the organizational level, having leadership support for SDM and multidisciplinary teams were viewed as critical to implementation. On the health system level, views diverged on whether embedding tools into electronic health records (EHRs), making SDM a criterion for accreditation and certification, and enacting legislation could promote SDM implementation.

CONCLUSION

Cancer care in the USA has currently limited room for SDM and is prone to paying lip service to the idea. Implementation efforts in US cancer care need to go further than interventions that target only the clinician-patient level. On a policy level, SDM could be included in alternative payment models. However, its implementation would need to be thoroughly assessed in order to prevent further misdirected incentivization through box ticking.

A skills network approach to physicians' competence in shared decision making

BACKGROUND

Measurement of physicians' competence in shared decision making (SDM) remains challenging with frequent disagreement between assessment methods.

OBJECTIVE

To conceptualize and measure physicians' SDM competence as an organized network of behavioural skills and to determine whether processing patient-reported data according to this model can be used to predict observer-rated competence.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of an observational study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Primary and specialty outpatient care physicians and consecutively recruited adult patients with a chronic condition who faced a treatment decision with multiple acceptable choices.

MEASURES

Network parameters constructed from patients' assessment of physicians' SDM skills as measured by the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and observer-rated SDM competence of physicians measured by three widely used observer-rated instruments.

RESULTS

29 physicians (12 female, 17 male; mean age 50.3 years) recruited 310 patients (59.4% female, 40.6% male; mean age 54.0 years) facing a decision mainly regarding type 2 diabetes (36.4%), chronic back pain (32.8%) or depressive disorder (26.8%). Although most investigated skills were interrelated, elicitation of the patient's treatment preferences showed the strongest associations with the other skills. Network parameters of this skill were also decisive in predicting observer-rated competence. Correlation between predicted competence scores and observer-rated measurements ranged from 0.710 to 0.785.

CONCLUSIONS

Conceptualizing physicians' SDM competence as a network of interacting skills enables the measurement of observer-rated competence using patient-reported data. In addition to theoretical implications for defining and training medical competences, the findings open a new way to measure physicians' SDM competence under routine conditions.

Treatment Decision Making and Financial Toxicity in Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Oncologists have increasingly been proponents of shared decision making (SDM) to enhance patient outcomes and reduce unnecessary health care spending. However, its effect on patient out-of-pocket costs is unknown. This study investigated the relationship between patient preferences for SDM and financial toxicity (FT) in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study utilized surveys of women aged ≥ 18 with MBC who received care at two academic hospitals in Alabama from 2017 to 2019. Patients self-reported their SDM preference (Control Preferences Scale) and FT (Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity [COST] tool; 11-item scale, with lower scores indicating worse FT). Effect sizes were calculated using the proportion of variance explained (R²) or Cramer's V. Differences in FT by SDM preference were estimated using mixed models clustered by site and treating medical oncologist.

RESULTS

In 95 women with MBC, 44% preferred SDM, 29% preferred provider-driven decision making, and 27% preferred patient-driven decision making. Patients preferring SDM were more often college educated (53% vs. 39%; V = 0.12) with an income greater than $40,000/y (55% vs. 43%; V = 0.18). Overall median COST was 22 (interquartile range, 16-29). After adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics, patients preferring patient-driven decision making trended toward worse FT (COST 17: 95% confidence interval, 12-22) compared to those preferring SDM (COST 19: 95% confidence interval, 15-23) and those preferring provider-driven decision making (COST 22: 95% confidence interval, 17-27).

CONCLUSION

Patients preferring more patient-driven decision making reported worse FT, although differences did not reach statistical significance. Further research is needed to understand this relationship.

Impact of Neurosurgical Consultation With 360-Degree Virtual Reality Technology on Patient Engagement and Satisfaction

BACKGROUND

Virtual Reality (VR) is being applied as a clinical tool to engage and educate patients during their neurosurgery consultation for various skull base and pituitary tumor pathologies.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of VR implementation on patient satisfaction, understanding and comfort level, shared decision making, and surgical conversion using a 2-fold study.

METHODS

Patient feedback was collected after consultations with patient-specific VR renderings by Surgical Theater in a prospective survey study. A retrospective review of 257 new patients was also conducted to determine the impact of VR implementation on surgical conversion and patient outmigration rates.

RESULTS

Patients reported significantly higher ratings for overall satisfaction, understanding of their medical condition and treatment plan, and how well the physician communicated during the VR consultation compared to prior consultation(s). The Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) scores for physician communication, hospital rating, and hospital recommendation were 23%, 24%, and 23%, respectively, higher than the national average. A 32% improvement in patient retention and conversion rates resulted from consultations with patient-specific VR models of their lesions (P &lt; .0001).

CONCLUSION

These findings indicate that VR is a powerful tool for enhancing patient engagement and education.

Parental role in decision-making for pediatric surgery: Perceptions of involvement in consultations for tonsillectomy

OBJECTIVE

Parental role in decision-making has implications for quality of care. We describe roles of parent participation in decision-making for tonsillectomy.

METHODS

Parents reported preferred role in decision-making before consultations for tonsillectomy and the role they experienced after their consult. Parents completed questionnaires, including items evaluating clinician/parent communication. Clinicians rated perception of parents' preferred role in decision-making. Congruence between parent and clinician responses was evaluated via kappa analysis. Logistic regression identified associations between decision-making roles and socioemotional and communication factors.

RESULTS

Consults between 63 parents and 8 otolaryngologists were analyzed.There was inadequate agreement between clinician and parent ratings of preferred roles (37%, p = 0.6, 95% CI [-0.09, 0.001]). Parents perceived greater involvement when clinicians discussed reasons to have (OR = 4.3, p = 0.03) or not have (OR = 4.1, p = 0.005) surgery. Parents perceived less involvement when clinicians used jargon (OR = 0.1, p = 0.03), and when parents trusted clinicians (OR = 0.4, p = 0.049), or experienced greater decisional conflict (OR = 0.9, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Parents and clinicians perceived parental preference for decision-making involvement differently during consultations for tonsillectomy. Clinician information-sharing, jargon use, and parent trust in clinician predicted extent of perceived engagement.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Findings may enhance understanding of strategies to effectively communicate and engage parents in shared decision-making for pediatric surgical care.

The use of PROMs and shared decision-making in medical encounters with patients: An opportunity to deliver value-based health care to patients

BACKGROUND

The recent emphasis on value-based health care (VBHC) is thought to provide new opportunities for shared decision-making (SDM) in the Netherlands, especially when using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in routine medical encounters. It is still largely unclear about how PROMs could be linked to SDM and what we expect from clinicians in this respect.

AIM

To describe approaches and lessons learned in the fields of SDM and VBHC implementation that converge in using PROMs in medical encounters.

APPROACH

Based on input from three Dutch forerunner case examples and available evidence about SDM and VBHC, we describe barriers and facilitators regarding the use of PROMs and SDM in the medical encounter. Barriers and facilitators were structured according to a conversational model that included monitoring and managing, team talk, option talk, choice talk, and decision talk. Key lessons learned and recommendations were synthesized.

RESULTS

The use of individual, N = 1 PROMs scores in the medical encounter has been largely achieved in the forerunner projects. Conversation on monitoring and managing is relatively well implemented, and option talk to some extent, unlike team talk, and decision talk. Aggregated PROMs information describing outcomes of treatment options seemed to be scarcely used. Experienced barriers largely corresponded to what is known from the literature, eg, perceived lack of time and lack of tools summarizing the options. Some concerns were identified about increasing health care consumption as a result of using PROMs and SDM in the medical encounter.

CONCLUSION

Successful implementation of SDM within VBHC initiatives may not be self-evident, even though individual, N = 1 PROMs scores are being used in the medical encounter. Education and staff resources on meso and macro levels may facilitate the more time-consuming SDM aspects. It seems fruitful to especially target team talk and choice talk in redesigning clinical pathways.

Moving Beyond the Rhetoric of Shared Decision-Making: Designing Personal Health Record Technology With Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVES

Engaging young adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in the self-management of daily tasks and decision-making provides opportunities for positive health outcomes. However, emerging adulthood and care transitions are associated with decreased clinic attendance and diabetes complications. Shared decision-making (SDM) is an optimal approach for health decisions; however, it has been difficult to implement in practice. Personal health record (PHR) technology is a promising approach for overcoming such barriers. Still, today, PHRs have yet to root themselves into care and present an opportunity for improvement in SDM and engagement in self-management decision-making. The objective of this study was to confirm a functional model of an integrated shared decision-making-personal health record system (e-PHR) by young adults with T1D and care providers.

METHODS

User-centred design approach whereby young adults with T1D, 18 to 24 years of age, and care providers matched PHR functions for the SDM process to confirm an e-PHR functional model.

RESULTS

An e-PHR functional model justified by young adults (n=7) and providers (n=15) was confirmed. The conceptual design was architected within an interconnected digital health ecosystem and integrated 23 PHR functionalities for SDM with a moderate level of agreement between patients and providers (Cohen kappa 0.60 to 0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

The establishment of an e-PHR functional model is a precursor to system design requirements. Results highlight the conceivable value of integrating SDM into PHRs for engagement of young adults with T1D in self-management decision-making. Design implications highlight key challenges for future research and system development, including information exchange across disparate systems, usability considerations and system intelligence for information personalization and decision-support tools.

Key components of shared decision making models: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To (1) provide an up-to-date overview of shared decision making (SDM)-models, (2) give insight in the prominence of components present in SDM-models, (3) describe who is identified as responsible within the components (patient, healthcare professional, both, none), (4) show the occurrence of SDM-components over time, and (5) present an SDM-map to identify SDM-components seen as key, per healthcare setting.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Peer-reviewed articles in English presenting a new or adapted model of SDM.

INFORMATION SOURCES

Academic Search Premier, Cochrane, Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science were systematically searched for articles published up to and including September 2, 2019.

RESULTS

Forty articles were included, each describing a unique SDM-model. Twelve models were generic, the others were specific to a healthcare setting. Fourteen were based on empirical data, 26 primarily on analytical thinking. Fifty-three different elements were identified and clustered into 24 components. Overall, Describe treatment options was the most prominent component across models. Components present in >50% of models were: Make the decision (75%), Patient preferences (65%), Tailor information (65%), Deliberate (58%), Create choice awareness (55%), and Learn about the patient (53%). In the majority of the models (27/40), both healthcare professional and patient were identified as actors. Over time, Describe treatment options and Make the decision are the two components which are present in most models in any time period. Create choice awareness stood out for being present in a markedly larger proportion of models over time.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides an up-to-date overview of SDM-models, showing that SDM-models quite consistently share some components but that a unified view on what SDM is, is still lacking. Clarity about what SDM constitutes is essential though for implementation, assessment, and research purposes. A map is offered to identify SDM-components seen as key.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration CRD42015019740.

Strategies to evaluate healthcare provider trainings in shared decision-making (SDM): a systematic review of evaluation studies

DESIGN AND OBJECTIVES

We performed a systematic review of studies evaluating healthcare provider (HCP) trainings in shared decision-making (SDM) to analyse their evaluation strategies.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

HCP trainings in SDM from all healthcare settings.

METHODS

We searched scientific databases (Medline, PsycInfo, CINAHL), performed reference and citation tracking, contacted experts in the field and scanned the Canadian inventory of SDM training programmes for healthcare professionals. We included articles reporting data of summative evaluations of HCP trainings in SDM. Two reviewers screened records, assessed full-text articles, performed data extraction and assessed study quality with the integrated quality criteria for review of multiple study designs (ICROMS) tool. Analysis of evaluation strategies included data source use, use of unpublished or published measures and coverage of Kirkpatrick's evaluation levels. An evaluation framework based on Kirkpatrick's evaluation levels and the Quadruple Aim framework was used to categorise identified evaluation outcomes.

RESULTS

Out of 7234 records, we included 41 articles reporting on 30 studies: cluster-randomised (n=8) and randomised (n=9) controlled trials, controlled (n=1) and non-controlled (n=7) before-after studies, mixed-methods (n=1), qualitative (n=1) and post-test (n=3) studies. Most studies were conducted in the USA (n=9), Germany (n=8) or Canada (n=7) and evaluated physician trainings (n=25). Eleven articles met ICROMS quality criteria. Almost all studies (n=27) employed HCP-reported outcomes for training evaluation and most (n=19) additionally used patient-reported (n=12), observer-rated (n=10), standardised patient-reported (n=2) outcomes or training process and healthcare data (n=10). Most studies employed a mix of unpublished and published measures (n=17) and covered two (n=12) or three (n=10) Kirkpatrick's levels. Identified evaluation outcomes covered all categories of the proposed framework.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies to evaluate HCP trainings in SDM varied largely. The proposed evaluation framework maybe useful to structure future evaluation studies, but international agreement on a core set of outcomes is needed to improve evidence.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016041623.

Shared decision making: relevant concepts and facilitating strategies

As the paradigm in healthcare nowadays is the evidence-based, patient-centered decision making, the issue of shared decision making (SDM) is highlighted. The aims of this manuscript were to look at the relevant concepts and suggest the facilitating strategies for overcoming barriers of conducting SDM. While the definitions of SDM were discordant, several concepts such as good communication, individual autonomy, patient participants, and patient-centered decision-making were involved. Further, the facilitating strategies of SDM were to educate and train physician, to apply clinical practice guidelines and patient decision aids, to develop valid measurement tools for evaluation of SDM processes, and to investigate the impact of SDM.