Is it time to refresh the heart team? New paradigms for shared decision making

Getting the best from the Heart Team: guidance for cardiac multidisciplinary meetings

The purpose of this document is to update the existing joint British Societies recommendations on multidisciplinary meetings (MDMs) published in 2015 to reflect changes in practice. We aim to provide guidance on the structure and function of MDMs which should be taking place in every cardiac surgical centre. Out of scope are MDMs that do not require the routine presence of a cardiac surgeon such as electrophysiology MDMs and those which are not provided in every centre, such as complex aortic surgery.

The Heart Team for Coronary Revascularization Decisions

The 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI coronary artery disease revascularization guideline highlights the importance of the multidisciplinary heart team in making patient-centered, evidence-based clinical decisions for patients considered for coronary revascularization. We present 2 cases highlighting aspects of heart team decision making for complex patients with coronary artery disease. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.)

Professionals' views on shared decision-making in severe aortic stenosis

OBJECTIVE

To provide insight into professionals' perceptions of and experiences with shared decision-making (SDM) in the treatment of symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS).

METHODS

A semistructured interview study was performed in the heart centres of academic and large teaching hospitals in the Netherlands between June and December 2020. Cardiothoracic surgeons, interventional cardiologists, nurse practitioners and physician assistants (n=21) involved in the decision-making process for treatment of severe AS were interviewed. An inductive thematic analysis was used to identify, analyse and report patterns in the data.

RESULTS

Four primary themes were generated: (1) the concept of SDM, (2) knowledge, (3) communication and interaction, and (4) implementation of SDM. Not all respondents considered patient participation as an element of SDM. They experienced a discrepancy between patients' wishes and treatment options. Respondents explained that not knowing patient preferences for health improvement hinders SDM and complicating patient characteristics for patient participation were perceived. A shared responsibility for improving SDM was suggested for patients and all professionals involved in the decision-making process for severe AS.

CONCLUSIONS

Professionals struggle to make highly complex treatment decisions part of SDM and to embed patients' expectations of treatment and patients' preferences. Additionally, organisational constraints complicate the SDM process. To ensure sustainable high-quality care, professionals should increase their awareness of patient participation in SDM, and collaboration in the pathway for decision-making in severe AS is required to support the documentation and availability of information according to the principles of SDM.