Shared decision-making in psychiatry: a study of patient attitudes

Shifting Perspectives on the Challenges of Shared Decision Making in Mental Health Care

Although shared decision making (SDM) has become the most preferable way in doctor-patient communication, it is not fully implemented in mental health care likely due to the complex nature of psychiatric syndromes and treatments. In this review we provide a systematic overview of all perceived and reported barriers to SDM in the literature, acknowledging field-specific challenges, and offering perspectives to promote its wider use. We conducted a systematic search of the wider literature in different databases and included all publications mentioning specified barriers to SDM in psychiatric care. Relevant data and opinions were categorised into micro-, meso- and macro-level themes and put into clinical perspective. We derived 20 barriers to SDM from 100 studies and reports. Eight were on micro-level care delivery, seven involved meso-level issues, five concerned macro-level themes. The multitude of perceived and actual barriers to SDM underline the challenges its implementation poses in mental health care, some of which can be resolved while others are inherent to the nature of the care, with its long-term relationships, complex dynamics, and social consequences, all requiring a flexible approach. We present four perspectives to help change views on the potential of SDM in mental health care.

Antipsychotic utilisation and persistence in Australia: A nationwide 5-year study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the utilisation and persistence of antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia in Australia.

METHODS

A retrospective study using the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme database of a representative 10% sample. All adults with schizophrenia who were dispensed three or more supplies of oral (including clozapine) or long-acting injectable antipsychotics between 1 June 2015 and 31 May 2020 were included. Persistence time in treatment was evaluated using survival analysis and Cox hazard ratios.

RESULTS

In all, 26,847 adults with schizophrenia were studied. Oral second-generation antipsychotics were more frequently dispensed than the other antipsychotic groups studied. Median treatment persistence times were 18.3 months for second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectables, 10.7 months for oral second-generation antipsychotics and were significantly lower for both formulations of first-generation antipsychotics at 5.2 months (long-acting injectables) and 3.7 months (oral). The median persistence time for clozapine was significantly longer than all other antipsychotics groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral second-generation antipsychotics and second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectables accounted for over 75% and 13% of all antipsychotics in Australia, respectively. Concerns over medication adherence and subsequent relapse have not translated into increased long-acting injectable usage despite their significantly longer persistence. Clozapine, the single most 'persistent' antipsychotic, was only used in 9% of people, although up to a third of all cases are likely to be treatment-resistant. Our data suggest clinicians should give consideration to the earlier use of second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectables and clozapine, to ameliorate prognosis in schizophrenia.

Conceptual understanding and applicability of shared decision-making in psychiatric care: An integrative review

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Shared decision-making is a concept originating in the medical field, and it is ideally based on a trustful relationship between the patient and the health professionals involved. Shared decision-making shows potential to strengthen patient autonomy and encourages patients to become involved in decisions regarding their treatment. WHAT DOES THE PAPER ADD TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: A universal concept and understanding of shared decision-making with relevance specifically to psychiatric clinical practice could not be identified in the analysed literature. Shared decision-making refers to a process, and how and whether the patient wishes to participate in the decision-making process should be clarified from the very beginning. On the basis of this synthesizing review, a process model for psychiatric practice was specified and illustrated to help lead health professionals, patients and other supporters through the decision-making process. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: The process of shared decision-making should be made visible to all persons involved, and it should be stated at the beginning that a decision must be made. Decisions regarding treatment are usually not limited to a single consultation. A collaborative approach including multiple health professionals and other supporters, such as peer workers and family members, is required. Psychiatric nurses could support patients during the process of decision-making and provide additional information, if requested.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Patient involvement in decisions regarding treatment has increasingly been supported in health care, and therefore, shared decision-making (SDM), as an informative and participative approach, is promoted in the scientific literature.

AIM

To review the current state of research regarding the conceptual understanding and implementation of SDM in psychiatric clinical practice.

METHOD

An integrative review that included empirical, theoretical and conceptual research published between 1997 and 2019 was conducted. For this, five health-related databases were searched.

RESULTS

Fourteen articles were included in the synthesis. No universal conceptual understanding of SDM regarding psychiatric care could be identified, although several articles highlighted the link with other concepts, such as autonomy and patient-centeredness. Furthermore, four additional key themes with relevance for the successful implementation of SDM in clinical practice were determined.

DISCUSSION

SDM refers to a process and is usually not limited to a single consultation. SDM shows the potential to enhance patient-centred and recovery-oriented care. A collaborative approach including multiple health professionals, peer workers and family members is required.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The process of SDM should be made visible for all parties involved. Nurses in particular could play a key role by collecting information regarding patient's preferences and by providing support.

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.

Centering the Voice of the Client: On Becoming a Collaborative Practitioner with Low-Income Individuals and Families

Despite current interest in collaborative practices, few investigations document the ways practitioners can facilitate collaboration during in-session interactions. This investigation explores verbatim psychotherapy transcripts to describe and illustrate therapist's communications that facilitate or hinder centering client's voice in work with socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. Four exemplar cases were selected from a large intervention trial aimed at improving shared decision making (SDM) skills of psychotherapists working with low-income clients. The exemplar cases were selected because they showed therapist's different degrees of success in facilitating SDM. Therapist's verbalizations were grouped into five distinct communicative practices that centered or de-centered the voice of clients. Communication practices were examined through the lens of collaborative approaches in family therapy. The analysis suggests that cross-fertilization between SDM and family-oriented collaborative and critical approaches shows promise to illuminate and enhance the challenging road from clinician-led to client-led interactions. This paper also stresses the importance of incorporating relational intersectionality with individuals and families who may not feel entitled to express their expectations or raise questions when interacting with authority figures.

Shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness: A concept analysis

AIM

Shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness has increasingly attracted attention. However, this concept has not been comprehensively clarified. This review aimed to clarify a concept of shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness such as schizophrenia, depression, and bipolar disorder, and propose an adequate definition.

METHODS

Rodgers' evolutionary concept analysis was used. MEDLINE, PsychINFO, and CINAHL were searched for articles written in English and published between 2010 and November 2019. The search terms were "psychiatr*" or "mental" or "schizophren*" or "depression" or "bipolar disorder", combined with "shared decision making". In total, 70 articles met the inclusion criteria. An inductive approach was used to identify themes and sub-themes related to shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness. Surrogate terms and a definition of the concept were also described.

RESULTS

Four key attributes were identified: user-professional relationship, communication process, user-friendly visualization, and broader stakeholder approach. Communication process was the densest attribute, which consisted of five phases: goal sharing, information sharing, deliberation, mutual agreement, and follow-up. The antecedents as prominent predisposing factors were long-term complex illness, power imbalance, global trend, users' desire, concerns, and stigma. The consequences included decision-related outcomes, users' changes, professionals' changes, and enhanced relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

Shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness is a communication process, involving both user-friendly visualization techniques and broader stakeholders. The process may overcome traditional power imbalance and encourage changes among both users and professionals that could enhance the dyadic relationship.

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.

An Interview Study of Professional Carers' Experiences of Supporting Patient Participation in a Maximum Security Forensic Psychiatric Setting

Patient participation in forensic psychiatric settings seems to be complex by nature, and previous studies show that patients rate their participation as lower in this context compared to general psychiatric contexts. Studies on caregivers' perspective could provide a clearer picture of the components and possibilities of patient participation in forensic psychiatry. The aim of the study is to describe carers' experiences in supporting patient participation in a maximum security forensic psychiatric care setting. Twelve psychiatric caregivers were interviewed about how they support patients' participation. The result shows that a complexity of patient participation emerges as a difficult act of balancing the paradoxical role of caring for the patient's interests and development, while simultaneously representing and adhering to the rules and regulations of the system in which one is employed. In conclusion, it is suggested that participation is comprehended as an umbrella term and that focus is directed to conceptualising what caregivers can do in order to create positive patient-carer relationships, as well as what constitutes such a relationship.

The Momentum trial: the efficacy of using a smartphone application to promote patient activation and support shared decision making in people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia in outpatient treatment settings: a randomized controlled single-blind trial

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is often defined as an interactive process that ensures that both patient and practitioner are actively involved in the treatment and that they share all relevant information to arrive at a mental health decision. Previous SDM interventions have found improvements in outcomes such as personal recovery, higher perceived involvement in treatment decisions and knowledge about one's disease. Still, SDM occurs less frequently in mental health care than in primary care. Electronic aids developed to support patient activation and SDM could be a promising mean to engage patients in their mental healthcare. The aim of this trial is to investigate the effects of using a smartphone app to promote patient activation and support SDM for people with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders in an outpatient treatment setting.

METHODS

This randomised controlled trial will allocate participants to one of two groups: (1) Intervention group: smartphone app and TAU (treatment as usual) or (2) Control group: TAU without the smartphone app. A total sample size of 260 people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizotypal or delusional disorder will be recruited from five OPUS teams (a specialized early intervention program) in Denmark between 2019 and 2020. The intervention will last for 6 months with data collection at baseline, and at 3 and 6 months. Primary outcome will be self-perceived patient activation. Secondary outcomes will be feeling of being prepared for SDM; self-efficacy; working alliance; treatment satisfaction; positive and negative symptoms; level of functioning; hope; and perceived efficacy in patient-provider interaction. Patients' and health providers' preferences in clinical decision making will be assessed. Patients' usage and perceived usefulness of the app will be explored.

DISCUSSION

This study will investigate the efficacy of using the smartphone app to support people with severe mental illness in engaging in their own healthcare management. The study may provide evidence to the idea that linking client and practitioner in digital solutions can have advantages in facilitating SDM in mental health. The trial will provide new knowledge of whether a digital healthcare solution can improve patient activation and support SDM for people with severe mental illness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT03554655 Registered on: June 13, 2018.

Going the distance: reviewing antipsychotic depot or long-acting injectable treatments in Australasia

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to provide an opinion paper reviewing the role of depot or long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic medications, with comments on individual newer LAIs such aripiprazole maintena and paliperidone palmitate. In particular, we share our recent experience of using paliperidone three-monthly LAI. We also reflect on the associated benefits and potential harms of LAIs, and when they may be used.

CONCLUSIONS

LAI antipsychotics are an important and arguably under-utilised therapeutic option, particularly where medication adherence is a priority, and where an informed patient opts for this formulation. Paliperidone is the first three-monthly LAI antipsychotic, and as such represents a significant advance in the range of treatment choices.