Organizational- and system-level characteristics that influence implementation of shared decision-making and strategies to address them - a scoping review

Challenges experienced by those with polycystic ovary syndrome in healthcare interactions: a qualitative evidence synthesis

Studies report interaction difficulties between patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and healthcare professionals (HCP). This systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis aimed to collate and synthesize the existing peer-reviewed literature investigating challenges for people with PCOS when interacting with HCP. Medline, PsycInfo, EMBASE, All EBM and CINAHL were searched from 1990 to September 2022. Study risk of bias (RoB) was performed and all textual data relevant to challenging interactions between patients with PCOS and HCP were extracted and analysed using thematic synthesis. Of the 6353 studies identified, 28 were included. Two were appraised as high, four as moderate and 22 as low RoB. Four analytic themes were derived illustrating that interactions were challenging when: (i) medical information (PCOS, its management) was not shared in the best way; (ii) information provision and deliberation opportunities were insufficient to achieve outcomes that mattered to patients; (iii) interactions prompted but did not support patient activation; and (iv) health system-level barriers (e.g. policies and guidelines) were present or made worse by HCP behaviour. Future research should examine methods for the implementation and evaluation of established frameworks for sharing medical information and supporting patient agency in the context of PCOS care.

Documentation of shared decision-making in diagnostic testing for dementia in Dutch general practice: A retrospective study in electronic patient records

OBJECTIVE

To explore (1) documentation of shared decision-making (SDM) in diagnostic testing for dementia in electronic patient records (EPR) in general practice and (2) study whether documentation of SDM is related to specific patient characteristics.

METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, EPRs of 228 patients in three Dutch general practices were explored for the documentation of SDM elements using Elwyn's model (team talk, option talk, decision talk). Patient characteristics (gender, age, comorbidities, chronic polypharmacy, the number of consultations on memory complaints) and decision outcome (wait-and-see, GP diagnostics, referral) were also extracted.

RESULTS

In EPRs of most patients (62.6 %), at least one SDM element was documented. Most often this concerned team talk (61.6 %). Considerably less often option talk (4.3 %) and decision talk (12.8 %) were documented. SDM elements were more frequently documented in patients with lower comorbidity scores and patients with a relatively high number of consultations. Decision talk was more frequently documented in referred patients.

CONCLUSION

Patients' and significant others' needs, goals, and wishes on diagnostic testing for dementia are often documented in EPRs.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Limited documentation of option and decision talk stresses the need for future SDM interventions to facilitate timely dementia diagnosis.

"We will be the ones bearing the consequences": A qualitative study of barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making in hospital-based maternity care

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women involved in decisions about their care report better health outcomes for themselves and their children. Shared decision-making (SDM) is a priority for health services; however, there is limited research on factors that help and hinder SDM in hospital-based maternity settings. The purpose of this study was to explore barriers and facilitators to SDM in a large tertiary maternity care service from the perspectives of multiple stakeholders.

METHODS

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 39 participants including women, clinicians, health service administrators and decision-makers, and government policymakers. The interview guide and thematic analysis were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify barriers and facilitators to SDM.

RESULTS

Women expect to be included in decisions about their care. Health service administrators and decision-makers, government policymakers, and most clinicians want to include them in decisions. Key barriers to SDM included lack of care continuity, knowledge, and clinician skills, as well as professional role and decision-making factors. Key facilitators pertained to policy and guideline changes, increased knowledge, professional role factors, and social influences.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed common barriers and facilitators to SDM and highlighted the need to consider perspectives outside the patient-clinician dyad. It adds to the limited literature on barriers and facilitators to SDM in hospital care settings. Organizational- and system-wide changes to service delivery are necessary to facilitate SDM. These changes may be enabled by education and training, changes to policies and guidelines to include and support SDM, and adequately timed information provision to enable SDM conversations.

Translation and cultural adaption of the control preference scale across various care settings in a Danish hospital

BACKGROUND

In recent decades, there has been a growing emphasis on involving patients in healthcare decision-making, driven by political, ethical, and research considerations. Although patient involvement is associated with improved health outcomes, understanding patient preferences regarding their role in decision-making is crucial for effective interventions. The Control Preferences Scale (CPS) measures patient preferences along a continuum from passive to active participation. However, its application in Denmark necessitates translation and cultural adaptation.

METHODOLOGY

This study aimed to translate and culturally adapt the CPS for Danish use across diverse healthcare settings: acute care, cancer care, elective surgery, chronic medical treatment, and parental involvement in pediatric care. Following a cross-sectional design, the translation process was systematically planned and executed using Beaton's guidelines, including the five stages: forward and back translation, synthesis, expert review, and pre-testing.

RESULTS

The translation and adaption process was carried out successfully. Few linguistic challenges were identified and resolved by the expert review. The findings of the pre-testing indicated high acceptability and usability of the adapted CPS among 152 Danish patients and parents. The collaborative role emerged as the most preferred across settings (69.8%), with passive roles more prevalent among cancer patients (30%) and parents waiting with their child to see a pediatrician (23.3%). Notable, more women preferred collaborative or active roles (83.9%) than men (73.9%). The content validity assessment yielded positive feedback, affirming the relevance and comprehensiveness of the CPS.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, the adaptation and validation of the CPS for Danish use proved successful, providing a valuable tool for assessing patient's role preferences in healthcare decision-making. However, future studies are recommended to ensure construct validity and reliability through psychometric testing.

Advance directives in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis - a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a neurodegenerative disease of the upper and lower motoneuron. It is associated with a life expectancy of 2-4 years after diagnosis. Individuals experience paralysis, dysphagia, respiratory failure and loss of communicative function, rendering advance care planning (ACP) critically important. This systematic review primarily aimed to internationally compare the application of advance directives (AD) and ACP in ALS. Its secondary aim was to identify ACP preferences, identify fields for future research and to generate recommendations for improving patient care through ACP.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Five electronic databases (Embase, Medline, Scopus, PsycInfo and CENTRAL) were searched for qualitative and quantitative primary literature from 1999 to 2024. Cross-references were used to identify additional publications. Study selection was performed based on inclusion criteria. Number and content of AD were extracted systematically. After statistical analysis consecutive meta-analysis was performed for international differences and changes over time. Quality assessment of studies was performed using the MMAT (Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool). PROSPERO Registration (June 07, 2021) : CRD42021248040.

RESULTS

A total of 998 records was screened of which 26 were included in the synthesis. An increase in publication numbers of 88.9% was observed from 1999 to 2024. Results regarding use and content of AD were heterogeneous and international differences were detected. AD were signed in 60.4% of records (1,629 / 2,696 patients). The number of AD decreased over time when separating the review period in two decades (1st 1999-2011: 78% vs. 2nd 2012-2024: 42%). Study quality was superior in qualitative and mixed method designs compared to quantitative studies.

CONCLUSION

Further prospective studies should include detailed analyses on preferences regarding ventilation and artificial nutrition in ALS and should encompass countries of the global south. Despite the complexity of ACP with regard to individual patient needs, ACP should be part of each individual support plan for ALS patients and should specifically comprise a discussion on the preferred place of death. The available disease-specific AD documents should be preferred.

Implementation of a Co-Design Strategy to Develop a Dashboard to Support Shared Decision Making in Advanced Cancer and Chronic Kidney Disease

Background: Shared decision making (SDM) is the process by which patients and clinicians exchange information and preferences to come to joint healthcare decisions. Clinical dashboards can support SDM by collecting, distilling, and presenting critical information, such as patient-reported outcomes (PROs), to be shared at points of care and in between appointments. We describe the implementation strategies and outcomes of a multistakeholder collaborative process known as "co-design" to develop a PRO-informed clinical dashboard to support SDM for patients with advanced cancer or chronic kidney disease (CKD). Methods: Across 14 sessions, two multidisciplinary teams comprising patients, care partners, clinicians, and other stakeholders iteratively co-designed an SDM dashboard for either advanced cancer (N = 25) or CKD (N = 24). Eligible patients, care partners, and frontline clinicians were identified by six physician champions. The co-design process included four key steps: (1) define "the problem", (2) establish context of use, (3) build a consensus on design, and (4) define and test specifications. We also evaluated our success in implementing the co-design strategy using measures of fidelity, acceptability, adoption, feasibility, and effectiveness which were collected throughout the process. Results: Mean (M) scores across implementation measures of the co-design process were high, including observer-rated fidelity and adoption of co-design practices (M = 19.1 on a 7-21 scale, N = 36 ratings across 9 sessions), as well as acceptability based on the perceived degree of SDM that occurred during the co-design process (M = 10.4 on a 0 to 12 adapted collaboRATE scale). Capturing the feasibility and adoption of convening multistakeholder co-design teams, min-max normalized scores (ranging from 0 to 1) of stakeholder representation demonstrated that, on average, 95% of stakeholder types were represented for cancer sessions (M = 0.95) and 85% for CKD sessions (M = 0.85). The co-design process was rated as either "fully" or "partially" effective by 100% of respondents, in creating a dashboard that met its intended objective. Conclusions: A co-design process was successfully implemented to develop SDM clinical dashboards for advanced cancer and CKD care. We discuss key strategies and learnings from this process that may aid others in the development and uptake of patient-centered healthcare innovations.

Correlates of perceived shared decision making with parents of children with special healthcare needs: Findings from the PART-CHILD study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the extent of perceived shared decision making (SDM) with parents of pediatric patients and to examine its association with characteristics of patients, professionals, and healthcare facilities.

METHODS

Parents of pediatric patients (n = 4383) were recruited in 15 social pediatric centers in Germany and provided information on perceived SDM (binary CollaboRATEpediatric score: optimal versus suboptimal extent of SDM), child age and sex, type of impairment, appointment, and healthcare professional present at the appointment. Organizational characteristics were assessed in a cross-sectional survey of staff at the study sites.

RESULTS

Overall, 58.4% of parents reported an optimal extent of SDM. The optimal extent of SDM was more likely reported by parents of girls (OR=1.27, p < 0.001) and children with physical (as opposed to cognitive and combined) impairments (OR=1.30, p = 0.006), and after appointments attended by allied health professionals (OR=1.28, p = 0.004). In addition, parents in facilities receiving financing in addition to compensation by statutory health insurance funds were less likely to report an optimal extent of perceived SDM.

CONCLUSION

While SDM with parents was mostly related to individual characteristics of children and professionals at appointments, organizational characteristics seemed less relevant in our study.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Staff should be made aware of lower SDM with parents of boys, older children, and those with cognitive impairments, and trained to improve the SDM in these groups.

Unravelling clinicians' shared decision-making adoption: a qualitative exploration through the lens of diffusion of innovations theory

OBJECTIVES

This study uses the diffusion of innovations (DOI) theory to comprehensively understand the adoption of shared decision-making (SDM) in clinical practice, specifically focusing on the 'knowledge' and 'persuasion' stages within DOI. We aim to understand the challenges and dynamics associated with SDM adoption, offering insights for more patient-centred decision-making in healthcare.

DESIGN

This qualitative study employs a modified framework analysis approach, integrating ethnographic and interview data from prior research, along with additional interviews. The framework used is based on the DOI theory.

STUDY SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This study was conducted in the obstetrics and gynaecology department of a tertiary teaching hospital in the Eastern region of the Netherlands. It included interviews with 20 participants, including gynaecologists, obstetrics registrars and junior doctors currently practising in the department. Additionally, data from prior research conducted within the same department were incorporated, ensuring the maintenance of contextual consistency.

RESULTS

Findings reveal a complex interplay between SDM's benefits and challenges. Clinicians value SDM for upholding patient autonomy and enhancing medical practice, viewing it as valuable for medical decision-making. Decision aids are seen as advantageous in supporting treatment decisions. Challenges include compatibility issues between patient and clinician preferences, perceptions of SDM as time-consuming and difficult and limitations imposed by the rapid pace of healthcare and its swift decisions. Additionally, perceived complexity varies by situation, influenced by colleagues' attitudes, with limited trialability and sparsely observed instances of SDM.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians' decision to adopt or reject SDM is multifaceted, shaped by beliefs, cognitive processes and contextual challenges. Cognitive dissonance is critical as clinicians reconcile their existing practices with the adoption of SDM. Practical strategies such as practice assessments, open discussions about SDM's utility and reflective practice through professional development initiatives empower clinicians to make the best informed decision to adopt or reject SDM.

Decisional needs and interventions for young women considering contraceptive options: an umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Although women face a wide range of contraceptive options, globally, young women are at risk of unintended pregnancies. Our umbrella review aimed to determine the decisional needs of nulligravida women aged 11 to 30 considering contraceptive options and identify effective interventions to support their involvement in making decisions about contraceptive use.

METHODS

We followed Joanna Briggs Institute methods for umbrella reviews, theoretically guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. We searched six electronic databases. Two reviewers independently screened citations, extracted data, and appraised quality using AMSTAR2. We analysed findings descriptively.

RESULTS

Of 124 citations, we identified 11 reviews of variable quality (critically low to moderate quality): Six reported decisional needs and 5 reported on interventions. Decisional needs of young women were: (a) information needs about contraceptive options (e.g., mechanism of actions, eligibility, administration, side effects); (b) unclear values (concerns about hormone use) and features of different options (based on their religious values); and (c) need for support and resources (support from society and need for privacy). Compared to controls, decision support interventions including patient decision aids and patient education material increased knowledge and improved discussion of options with their clinicians.

CONCLUSION

Young women making contraceptive decisions experience unmet decisional needs. Effective interventions such as patient decision aids and general patient education materials may address their decisional needs and enhance their level of participation in making contraception decisions. Implications and contribution to the field: Young women's decisional needs when considering contraceptive use are informational needs, unclear values (including religious influences), need for support and resources when facing this decision. Interventions, such as patient decision aid and patient education material can, address decisional needs by improving young women's knowledge about contraceptive options.

Health-care organization characteristics in cancer care delivery: an integrated conceptual framework with content validation

Context can influence cancer-related outcomes. For example, health-care organization characteristics, including ownership, leadership, and culture, can affect care access, communication, and patient outcomes. Health-care organization characteristics and other contextual factors can also influence whether and how clinical discoveries reduce cancer incidence, morbidity, and mortality. Importantly, policy, market, and technology changes are transforming health-care organization design, culture, and operations across the cancer continuum. Consequently, research is essential to examine when, for whom, and how organizational characteristics influence person-level, organization-level, and population-level cancer outcomes. Understanding organizational characteristics-the structures, processes, and other features of entities involved in health care delivery-and their dynamics is an important yet understudied area of care delivery research across the cancer continuum. Research incorporating organizational characteristics is critical to address health inequities, test care delivery models, adapt interventions, and strengthen implementation. The field lacks conceptual grounding, however, to help researchers identify germane organizational characteristics. We propose a framework identifying organizational characteristics relevant for cancer care delivery research based on conceptual work in health services, organizational behavior, and management science and refined using a systematic review and key informant input. The proposed framework is a tool for organizing existing research and enhancing future cancer care delivery research. Following a 2012 Journal of the National Cancer Institute monograph, this work complements National Cancer Institute efforts to stimulate research addressing the relationship between cancer outcomes and contextual factors at the patient, provider, team, delivery organization, community, and health policy levels.

Healthcare systems collaborating to implement a shared decision-making tool in the electronic health record and build evidence on its adoption and use

Introduction

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a method of care by which patients and clinicians work together to co-create a plan of care. Electronic health record (EHR) integration of SDM tools may increase adoption of SDM. We conducted a "lightweight" integration of a freely available electronic SDM tool, CV Prevention Choice, within the EHRs of three healthcare systems. Here, we report how the healthcare systems collaborated to achieve integration.

Methods

This work was conducted as part of a stepped wedge randomized pragmatic trial. CV Prevention Choice was developed using guidelines for HTML5-based web applications. Healthcare systems integrated the tool in their EHR using documentation the study team developed and refined with lessons learned after each system integrated the electronic SDM tool into their EHR. CV Prevention Choice integration populates the tool with individual patient data locally without sending protected health information between the EHR and the web. Data abstraction and secure transfer systems were developed to manage data collection to assess tool implementation and effectiveness outcomes.

Results

Time to integrate CV Prevention Choice in the EHR was 12.1 weeks for the first system, 10.4 weeks for the second, and 9.7 weeks for the third. One system required two 1-hour meetings with study team members and two healthcare systems required a single 1-hour meeting. Healthcare system information technology teams collaborated by sharing information and offering improvements to documentation. Challenges included tracking CV Prevention Choice use for reporting and capture of combination medications. Data abstraction required refinements to address differences in how each healthcare system captured data elements.

Conclusion

Targeted documentation on tool features and resource mapping supported collaboration of IT teams across healthcare systems, enabling them to integrate a web-based SDM tool with little additional research team effort or oversight. Their collaboration helped overcome difficulties integrating the web application and address challenges to data harmonization for trial outcome analyses.

Shared decision-making in undergraduate nursing and medical education: An explorative dual-method study

OBJECTIVE

This study explores how shared decision-making (SDM) is integrated in undergraduate nursing and medical education.

METHODS

A dual-method design was applied. The integration of SDM in medicine and nursing education programs (i.e. SDM on paper) was explored through document analyses; the integration of SDM in curricula (i.e. SDM in class) through interviews with teachers and curriculum coordinators (N = 19).

RESULTS

A majority of the education programs featured SDM, mostly non-explicit. In curricula SDM was generally implicitly featured in compulsory courses across all study years. SDM was often integrated into preexisting theories and models and taught through various methods and materials. Generally, teachers and supervisors were not trained in SDM themselves. They assessed students' competence in SDM in a summative manner.

CONCLUSION

Overall, SDM was featured in undergraduate nursing and medical education, however, very implicitly.

Person-centred medicine in the care home setting: development of a complex intervention

BACKGROUND

Person-centred medicine is recommended in the care of older patients. Yet, involvement of care home residents and relatives in medication processes remains limited in routine care. Therefore, we aimed to develop a complex intervention focusing on resident and relative involvement and interprofessional communication to support person-centred medicine in the care home setting.

METHODS

The development took place from October 2021 to March 2022 in the Municipality of Aarhus, Denmark. The study followed the Medical Research Council guidance on complex intervention development using a combination of theoretical, evidence-based, and partnership approaches. The patient involvement tool, the PREparation of Patients for Active Involvement in medication Review (PREPAIR), was included in a preliminary intervention model. Study activities included developing programme theory, engaging stakeholders, and exploring key uncertainties through interviews, co-producing workshops, and testing with end-users to develop the intervention and an implementation strategy. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Interprofessional Shared Decision Making Model were used. Data were analysed using a rapid analysis approach.

RESULTS

Before the workshops, six residents and four relatives were interviewed. Based on their feedback, PREPAIR was modified to the PREPAIR care home to fit the care home population. In total, ten persons participated in the co-producing workshops, including health care professionals and municipal managerial and quality improvement staff. The developed intervention prototype was tested for three residents and subsequently refined to the final intervention, including two fixed components (PREPAIR care home and an interprofessional medication communication template) delivered in a flexible three-stage workflow. Additionally, a multi-component implementation strategy was formed. In line with the developed programme theory, the intervention supported health care professionals´ awareness about resident and relative involvement. It provided a structure for involvement, empowered the residents to speak, and brought new insights through dialogue, thereby supporting involvement in medication-related decisions. The final intervention was perceived to be relevant, acceptable, and feasible in the care home setting.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that the final intervention may be a viable approach to facilitate person-centred medicine through resident and relative involvement. This will be further explored in a planned feasibility study.

Shared Decision Making in Oncology and Its Implementation in Cervical Cancer Management in the Philippines: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE

Shared decision making (SDM) is an approach where clinicians and patients make decisions together using the best available evidence. Although much studied, recognized to be ethically imperative, and recommended in international health policies, it remains poorly implemented. In the Philippines, there are limited studies on patient decision making preferences and SDM. Practical guidance on the implementation of SDM or use of patient decision aids (PtDAs) is often not detailed in existing national clinical practice guidelines in oncology.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of Philippine literature on SDM in oncology and an iterative review of international literature on the philosophy and methods of SDM, the utility and effectiveness of PtDAs, and the facilitators and barriers to implementation or usage. We contextualized our review to the cervical cancer management and health service delivery in the Philippines.

RESULTS

Local literature is limited to five scientific publications and two registered studies. International literature encompasses patient decisional preferences, the role of PtDAs and the standards for their development and evaluation, their effectiveness, and barriers and facilitators to their use in cancer-related decision making. We discussed the implications on the management of cervical cancer in the Philippines, challenges in health service delivery and standards, and SDM research.

CONCLUSION

Local SDM research is limited. Our preliminary experience in a multicenter clinical trial in Manila on PtDA use in the framework of SDM in cervical cancer suggest good patient and clinician acceptability. Challenges to implementation such as unfavorable financial situations, urgency of clinical decisions, low patient or caregiver educational attainment, and poor integration of multidisciplinary and SDM in organizational workflows will be important when implementing SDM in different settings.

Information and communication priorities of patients and healthcare professionals in shared decision making regarding adjuvant systemic breast cancer treatment: A survey study

PURPOSE

To assess information and communication priorities of patients and healthcare professionals in Shared Decision Making about adjuvant systemic treatment of primary breast cancer and identify key decision-relevant information accordingly.

METHODS

Patients (N = 122) and professionals working with breast cancer patients (N = 118), of whom 38 were nurse practitioners and 32 nurses, were recruited using convenience sampling, and surveyed about information/communication aspects key to decision-making, using ranking assignments. We further posed a simple open question, questions about receiving population-based statistics versus personalized statistics concerning treatment outcomes, and their attitude and experience concerning Shared Decision Making. Data were analyzed using descriptive analysis and a qualitative analysis.

RESULTS

Both patients and professionals prioritized information about treatment outcomes (i.e., survival, recurrence) as key decision-relevant information for patients. Patients prioritized information about relatively severe treatment side-effects and late effects (e.g., blood clot, stroke), whilst professionals prioritized information about effects that occur relatively often (e.g., hair loss, fatigue). Patients specifically wanted to know if the benefit of treatment is worth the negative impact. Both groups prioritized personalized statistics over population-based statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

Some differences between patients and professionals were found in information and communication priorities, specifically related to the different side-effects. It seems worthwhile to precisely address these side-effects in Shared Decision Making concerning adjuvant systemic treatment. Furthermore, it seems important to deliberate together on the question if expected benefit of treatment is worth the potential negative impact for the individual patient.

Changes in intention to use an interprofessional approach to decision-making following training: a cluster before-and-after study

BACKGROUND

Health professionals in home care work in interprofessional teams. Yet most training in decision support assumes a one-on-one relationship with patients. We assessed the impact of an in-person training session in interprofessional shared decision-making (IP-SDM) on home care professionals' intention to adopt this approach.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of a cluster stepped-wedge trial using a before-and-after study design. We collected data among home care professionals from November 2016 to February 2018 in 9 health and social services centers in Quebec, Canada. The intervention was an in-person IP-SDM training session. Intention to engage in IP-SDM pre- and post-session (dependent variable) was compared using a continuing professional development evaluation scale (CPD-Reaction) informed by the Godin's Integrated Behavioral Model for health professionals. We also assessed socio-demographic and psychosocial variables (beliefs about capabilities, beliefs about consequences, social influence and moral norm). We performed bivariate and multivariate analysis to identify factors influencing post-intervention intention. We used the STROBE reporting guidelines for observational studies to report our results.

RESULTS

Of 134 respondents who provided complete pairs of questionnaires (pre- and post-), most were female (90.9%), mean age was 42 (± 9.3) years and 66.9% were social workers. Mean intention scores decreased from 5.84 (± 1.19) to 5.54 (± 1.35) (Mean difference = -0.30 ± 1.16; p = 0.02). Factors associated with higher intention post-intervention were social influence (ß = 0.34, p = 0.01) and belief about capabilities (ß = 0.49, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

After in-person IP-SDM training, healthcare professionals' intention to engage in IP-SDM decreased. However, the scope of this decrease is probably not clinically significant. Due to their association with intention, beliefs about capabilities, which translate into having a sense of self-competency in the new clinical behavior, and social influences, which translate into what important others think one should be doing, could be targets for future research aiming to implement IP-SDM in home care settings.

Behaviour, barriers and facilitators of shared decision making in breast cancer surgical treatment: A qualitative systematic review using a 'Best Fit' framework approach

BACKGROUND

Due to the diversity and high sensitivity of the treatment, there were difficulties and uncertainties in the breast cancer surgical decision-making process. We aimed to describe the patient's decision-making behaviour and shared decision-making (SDM)-related barriers and facilitators in breast cancer surgical treatment.

METHODS

We searched eight databases for qualitative studies and mixed-method studies about breast cancer patients' surgical decision-making process from inception to March 2021. The quality of the studies was critically appraised by two researchers independently. We used a 'best fit framework approach' to analyze and synthesize the evidence.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight qualitative studies and three mixed-method studies were included in this study. Four themes and 10 subthemes were extracted: (a) struggling with various considerations, (b) actual decision-making behaviours, (c) SDM not routinely implemented and (d) multiple facilitators and barriers to SDM.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients had various considerations of breast surgery and SDM was not routinely implemented. There was a discrepancy between information exchange behaviours, value clarification, decision support utilization and SDM due to cognitive and behavioural biases. When individuals made surgical decisions, their behaviours were affected by individual-level and system-level factors. Therefore, healthcare providers and other stakeholders should constantly improve communication skills and collaboration, and emphasize the importance of decision support, so as to embed SDM into routine practice.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This systematic review was conducted as part of a wider research entitled: Breast cancer patients' actual participation roles in surgical decision making: a mixed method research. The results of this project helped us to better analyze and generalize patients' views.

Decision aids for cancer survivors' engagement with survivorship care services after primary treatment: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To elucidate existing decision aids (DAs) in supporting cancer survivors' decisions to engage in cancer survivorship care services after primary treatment. Secondary objectives are to assess the DA acceptability, impact of DAs, and implementation barriers.

METHODS

Databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL) were searched to collect publications from inception through September 2021. Studies describing the development or evaluation of DAs used for survivorship care services after primary cancer treatment were included. Article selection and critical appraisal were conducted independently by two authors.

RESULTS

We included 16 studies that described 13 DAs and addressed multiple survivorship care domains: prevention of recurrence/new cancers in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors and breast cancer gene mutation carriers, family building options, health insurance plans, health promotion (substance use behavior, cardiovascular disease risk reduction), advanced care planning, and post-treatment follow-up intensity. The electronic format was used to design most DAs for self-administration. The content presentation covered decisional context, options, and value clarification exercises. DAs were acceptable and associated with higher knowledge but presented inconclusive decisional outcomes. Implementation barriers included lack of design features for connectivity to care, low self-efficacy, and low perceived DA usefulness among healthcare professionals. Other survivor characteristics included age, literacy, preferred timing, and setting.

CONCLUSIONS

A diverse range of DAs exists in survivorship care services engagement with favorable knowledge outcomes. Future work should clarify the impact of DAs on decisional outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

DA characterization and suggestions for prospective developers could enhance support for cancer survivors encountering complex decisions throughout the survivorship continuum.

Healthcare Professionals' Perceptions about the Implementation of Shared Decision-Making in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study from a Virtual Community of Practice

Background

The incorporation of shared decision making (SDM) is a central part of empowerment processes, as it facilitates greater activation on the part of patients, increasing the likelihood of them gaining control over their healthcare and developing skills to solve their health problems. Despite these benefits, there are still difficulties in the implementation of SDM among healthcare professionals due to internal and external factors related to the context and health systems.

Aim

To explore primary care professionals (PCPs)' perceptions of the SDM model, based on their preconceptions and experience in clinical practice.

Methods

A framework analysis was conducted on qualitative data derived from a virtual community practice forum, within a cluster-randomized clinical trial developed in the e-MPODERA project.

Results

The most important points in the opinions of the PCPs were: exploring the patients' values, preferences and expectations, providing them with and checking their understanding of up-to-date and evidence-based health information. The analysis revealed three themes: determinants of the implementation process of SDM, lack of consistency and dilemmas and benefits of PCP active listening, motivation and positive expectations of SDM.

Discussion

In our initial analysis, we examined the connections between the categories of the TDC model and its application in the primary care context. The categories related to the model reflect the theoretical understanding of professionals, while those related to perceptions of its application and use show certain discrepancies. These discrepancies could indicate a lack of understanding of the model and its real-world implications or insufficient commitment on the part of professionals or the organization to ensure its effective implementation.

Conclusions

Specific targeted training that addresses knowledge, attitudes and practice may resolve the aforementioned findings.

Promoting equitable sexual health communication among patients with minoritized racial/ethnic, sexual orientation, and gender identities: Strategies, challenges, and opportunities

People assigned female at birth (AFAB) with minoritized racial/ethnic, sexual orientation, and gender identities experience notable barriers to high-quality sexual healthcare. In confronting these barriers, patient-provider communication can be a crucial factor, influencing patients' experiences and access to relevant sexual health information and services by determining the quality of care. However, research that investigates this communication among AFAB patients with minoritized social positions is scarce, indicating a research gap regarding the perspectives and roles of healthcare providers in addressing such barriers to care for minoritized patients. Thus, we conducted a qualitative research study, using individual in-depth interviews, to explore the multi-level factors that influence providers' attitudes, knowledge, and skills regarding sexual health communication with AFAB patients with minoritized racial/ethnic, sexual orientation, and gender identities. Interpreting study findings within frameworks of person-centered care, intersectionality, and structural competency, we identified three cross-cutting themes. We found that providers frequently drew on their prior professional training, personal lived experiences, and population-level health disparities data when engaging in sexual health communication with minoritized AFAB patients. Participants reported minimal explicit training in anti-racist and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+)-competent care as a significant barrier to engaging in equitable sexual health communication with minoritized AFAB patients, which was exacerbated by many providers' lack of shared social positions and lived experiences with these patients. Providers also frequently applied population-level data to individual patients when formulating counseling and recommendations, which may undermine person-centered sexual health communication. Our findings suggest that critical anti-racist and LGBTQ+-competent provider training is urgently needed, and that health professional education and institutions must be transformed to better reflect and consider the experiences of patients with minoritized racial/ethnic, sexual orientation, and gender identities.

Contextual factors for the successful implementation of self-management interventions for chronic diseases: A qualitative review of reviews

OBJECTIVES

To identify and describe the most relevant contextual factors (CFs) from the literature that influence the successful implementation of self-management interventions (SMIs) for patients living with type 2 diabetes mellitus, obesity, COPD and/or heart failure.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative review of reviews. Four databases were searched, 929 reviews were identified, 460 screened and 61 reviews met the inclusion criteria. CFs in this paper are categorized according to the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases framework.

RESULTS

A great variety of CFs was identified on several levels, across all four chronic diseases. Most CFs were on the level of the patient, the professional and the interaction level, while less CFs were obtained on the level of the intervention, organization, setting and national level. No differences in main themes of CFs across all four diseases were found.

DISCUSSION

For the successful implementation of SMIs, it is crucial to take CFs on several levels into account simultaneously. Person-centered care, by tailoring SMIs to patients' needs and circumstances, may increase the successful uptake, application and implementation of SMIs in real-life practice. The next step will be to identify the most important CFs according to various stakeholders through a group consensus process.

Shared Decision Making in Perinatal Care

XXXX.

System-Level Factors Affecting Long-Term Care Wait Times: A Scoping Review

Waitlists for long-term care (LTC) continue to grow, and it is anticipated aging populations will generate additional demand. While literature focuses on individual-level factors, little is known about system-level factors contributing to LTC waitlists. We considered these factors through a scoping review. Inclusion/exclusion included publication year (2000-2022), language, paper focus, and document type. A total of 815 abstracts were identified, only 17 studies were included. Through qualitative content analysis, 10 key factors were identified: (1) waitlist management styles, (2) inconsistent standards of admission, (3) personnel shortage, (4) insufficient community-based care, (5) inequitable distribution of services, (6) lack of system integration, (7) unintended consequences of insurance plans, (8) ranking preferences, (9) the debate of supply and demand, and (10) financial incentives. Targeting interventions to address waitlist management, community-based care capacity, and demographic trends could improve access. More research is needed to address system-level barriers to timely LTC access.

Experiences and perspectives related to shared decision-making among outpatients with degenerative joint disease in Taiwan: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Various treatment options are available for degenerative joint disease (DJD). During clinical visits, patients and clinicians collaboratively make decisions regarding the optimal treatment for DJD; this is the essence of shared decision-making (SDM). Here, we collated and assessed the SDM-related experiences and perspectives of outpatients with DJD in Taiwan.

DESIGN

In-depth interviews and thematic analysis.

SETTING

Primary care clinics of a regional teaching hospital in Taiwan, October 2021-May 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

21 outpatients with at least three visits for DJD and who were aware of SDM.

RESULTS

Four main themes emerged in this study: first, equipping themselves with knowledge: outpatients obtained disease-related and treatment-related knowledge in various ways-seeking relevant information online, discussing with family and friends, learning from their own experiences or learning from professionals. Second, shared or not shared: physicians had different patterns for communicating with patients, particularly when demonstrating authority, performing mutual discussion, respecting patient preferences or responding perfunctorily. Third, seldom saying no to physician-prescribed treatment plans during clinical visits: most patients respected physicians' professionalism; however, some patients rejected physicians' recommendations indirectly, whereas some responded depending on their disease prognosis. Fourth, whose call?-participants decided to accept or reject a treatment plan independently or by discussing it with their families or by obeying their physicians' recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, patients with DJD sought reliable medical information from various sources before visiting doctors; however, when having a conversation with patients, physicians dominated the discussion on treatment options. The patient-physician interaction dynamics during the SDM process determined the final medical decision, which was in accordance with either patients' original autonomy or physicians' recommendations. To alleviate medical paternalism and physician dominance, patients should be empowered to engage in medical decision-making and share their opinions or concerns with their physicians. Family members should also be included in SDM.

Metacognitive scaffolding for preservice teachers' self-regulated design of higher order thinking tasks

This study compared two professional training courses targeting self-regulated learning (SRL) amongst preservice secondary science teachers in the context of didactic content knowledge for teaching higher-order thinking (HOT-PCK), either with metacognitive scaffolding (Meta group) or without (Control group). Measures included trainees' comprehension and design of HOT-PCK learning tasks, online SRL reflections about learning-teaching events, and self-reported SRL aptitude. Results indicated skill improvement in both groups, but the metacognitive support provided by the IMPROVE self-questioning technique better enhanced the preservice teachers' (PSTs) development of HOT-PCK, both as students (comprehension skills) and as future teachers (design skills), additionally as their ability to reflect on and control their studying. Findings also revealed significant correlations between SRL assessments (self-reports, event-based reflections) and between SRL and HOT-PCK indices. Consequences for teacher education combining SRL and HOT-PCK contexts are discussed.

A scoping review into the explanations for differences in the degrees of shared decision making experienced by patients

OBJECTIVES

In order to improve the degree of shared decision making (SDM) experienced by patients, it is necessary to gain insight into the explanations for the differences in these degrees.

METHODS

A scoping review of the literature on the explanations for differences in the degree of SDM experienced by patients was conducted. We assessed 21,329 references. Ultimately, 308 studies were included. The explanations were divided into micro, meso, and macro levels.

RESULTS

The explanations are mainly related to the micro level. They include explanations related to the patient and healthcare professionals, the relationship between the patient and the physician, and the involvement of the patient's relatives. On the macro level, explanations are related to restrictions within the healthcare system such as time constraints, and adequate information about treatment options. On the meso level, explanations are related to the continuity of care and the involvement of other healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

SDM is not an isolated process between the physician and patient. Explanations are connected to the macro, meso, and micro levels.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This scoping review suggests that there could be more focus on explanations related to the macro and meso levels, and on how explanations at different levels are interrelated.

Is it fun or is it hard? Studying physician-related attributes of shared decision-making by ranking case vignettes

Objective

This study investigated provider-related attributes of shared decision-making (SDM). It studied how physicians rank SDM cases compared to other cases, taking 'job satisfaction' and 'complexity' as ranking criteria.

Methods

Ten vignettes representing three cases of SDM, three cases dealing with patients' emotions and four with technical problems were designed to conduct a modified ordinal preference elicitation study. Gynaecologists and trainees ranked the vignettes for 'job satisfaction' or 'complexity'. Results were analysed by comparing the top three and down three ranked cases for each type of case using exact p-values obtained with custom-made randomisation tests.

Results

Participants experienced more satisfaction significantly from performing technical cases than cases dealing with emotions or SDM. Moreover, technical cases were perceived as less complex than those dealing with emotions. However, results were inconclusive about whether gynaecologists find SDM complex.

Conclusion

Findings suggest gynaecologists experience lower satisfaction with SDM tasks, possibly due to them falling outside their comfort zone. Integrating SDM into daily routines and promoting culture change favouring dealing with non-technical problems might help mitigate issues in SDM implementation.

Innovation

Our novel study assesses SDM in the context of task appraisal, illuminating the psychology of health professionals and providing valuable insights for implementation science.

Enhancing patient-centred care in dentistry: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Patient-centred care (PCC) is widely used within the medical setting, but there is a need for more research on PCC implementation in dentistry.

SOURCES OF DATA

A narrative review was conducted with literature identified from the Ovid Interface, including several databases such as Embase and Medline.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

PCC is associated with better health outcomes for patients, and greater work satisfaction among healthcare professionals.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

Efforts to implement PCC in dentistry are lacking due to several issues including non-consensus about PCC definition and lack of explicit guidelines on how to implement PCC in dentistry.

GROWING POINTS AND AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

A theory-derived model of PCC explicitly designed for the dental setting was identified. This serves as a starting point to enhance PCC in dentistry, though further research is needed to empirically test the implementation of this model.

Older Adult Frequent 9-1-1 Callers for Emergency Medical Services in a Large Metropolitan City: Individual- and System-Level Considerations

BACKGROUND

High utilizers of 9-1-1 place a substantial burden on emergency medical services (EMS). Results of a retrospective review of records data of the City of Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD) showed a significant increase in older adult high utilizers of 9-1-1.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to explore individual- and system-level factors implicated in EMS use among older adults, and to provide system recommendations to mitigate overuse.

METHODS

A phenomenological study was conducted, drawing from LAFD EMS records between 2012 and 2016 to identify and contact high-utilizing patients older than 50 years, their family, agency representatives, and LAFD personnel. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded and a thematic analysis was completed.

RESULTS

We conducted in-depth interviews with 27 participants, including patients (n = 8), their families (n = 6), social service agency representatives (n = 3), and LAFD personnel (n = 10). The following cross-cutting themes emerged: nature of 9-1-1 calls, barriers to access, and changing the system. In addition, LAFD and social service agency representatives identified the role of EMS responders and social agency representatives. Patients and their families agreed that previous encounters and interactions with emergency care responders were relevant factors.

CONCLUSIONS

This study described reasons for 9-1-1 calls related to medical and social service needs, including mental health care. Our analysis offers insight from different stakeholders' perspectives on access to medical care and types of barriers that interfere with medical care. All groups shared recommendations to advance access to medical and mental health care.

Barriers and facilitators for the implementation of patient-centered care in cardiogenetics: a Delphi study among ERN GUARD-heart members

Current clinical practice regarding inherited cardiac conditions has a biomedical focus, while psychological and social expertize and capacity are often lacking. As patient-centered care entails a multidisciplinary approach, the present study (a) explores barriers and facilitators of implementing patient-centered care in cardiogenetics and (b) contrasts various stakeholder viewpoints and perceived influence. We performed a three-round modified Delphi study using the input of a virtual expert panel comprising 25 medical professionals, 9 psychosocial professionals working in cardiogenetics, and 6 patient representatives. In round 1, the brainstorming phase and workshop breakout sessions were transcribed verbatim, coded and processed into unique statements listed as barriers and facilitators. In round 2, we asked the expert panel to validate, add or revise the list of barriers and facilitators. In round 3, the most relevant barriers and facilitators were ranked in importance. The experts identified 6 barriers dispersed across various levels of implementation. Having a blind spot for the patient perspective was of the highest importance, while the lack of multidisciplinary communication was ranked the lowest. We selected 9 facilitators: 2 were workflow related, 5 advocated various aspects of increased multidisciplinarity, and 2 suggested improvements in patient communication. This study revealed health system and organizational barriers and facilitators predominantly in implementing patient-centered care and only some patient-level factors. Some barriers and facilitators may be addressed easily (e.g., improving communication), while others may prove more complicated (e.g., biomedical thinking). Close interdisciplinary collaboration seems to be needed to implement PCC in cardiogenetics successfully.

The decision aid is the easy part: workflow challenges of shared decision making in cancer care

Delivering high-quality, patient-centered cancer care remains a challenge. Both the National Academy of Medicine and the American Society of Clinical Oncology recommend shared decision making to improve patient-centered care, but widespread adoption of shared decision making into clinical care has been limited. Shared decision making is a process in which a patient and the patient's health-care professional weigh the risks and benefits of different options and come to a joint decision on the best course of action for that patient on the basis of their values, preferences, and goals for care. Patients who engage in shared decision making report higher quality of care, whereas patients who are less involved in these decisions have statistically significantly higher decisional regret and are less satisfied. Decision aids can improve shared decision making-for example, by eliciting patient values and preferences that can then be shared with clinicians and by providing patients with information that may influence their decisions. However, integrating decision aids into the workflows of routine care is challenging. In this commentary, we explore 3 workflow-related barriers to shared decision making: the who, when, and how of decision aid implementation in clinical practice. We introduce readers to human factors engineering and demonstrate its potential value to decision aid design through a case study of breast cancer surgical treatment decision making. By better employing the methods and principles of human factors engineering, we can improve decision aid integration, shared decision making, and ultimately patient-centered cancer outcomes.

Piloting a shared decision-making clinician training intervention in maternity care in Australia: A mixed methods study

PROBLEM

Implementation of woman-centred care in evidence-based maternity practice requires clinicians to be skilled in shared decision-making, yet there is limited training or research into such interventions.

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making enables women to make informed decisions in partnership with clinicians where there are varied clinical options in relation to indications for and timing of planned birth.

AIM

We aimed to develop a shared decision-making training intervention and evaluate its feasibility and acceptability to midwives and obstetricians.

METHODS

The intervention was co-designed by midwifery and medical clinician-researchers, and a consumer representative. Online training and demonstration videos were distributed to midwives and obstetricians in three Sydney hospitals, followed by two online workshops in 2021 and 2022 where participants practised shared decision-making in roleplaying scenarios tailored to timing of birth. Training was evaluated using post-workshop and post-training surveys and semi-structured qualitative interviews.

FINDINGS

The training workshop format, duration and content were well received. Barriers to the uptake of shared decision-making were time, paternalistic practices and fear of repercussions of centring women in the decision-making process.

DISCUSSION

The intervention enabled midwifery and medical colleagues to learn communication repertoires from each other in woman-centred discussions around timing of birth. Roleplay scenarios enabled participants to observe and provide feedback on their colleagues' shared decision-making practices, while providing a space for collective reflection on ways to promote, and mitigate barriers to, its implementation in practice.

CONCLUSION

Shared decision-making training supports maternity clinicians in developing skills that implement woman-centred care in the timing of planned birth.

Implementation of Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care and Pulmonary Clinics: Pragmatic Clinical Trial of Electronic Health Record-Integrated Everyday Shared Decision-Making Tool and Clinician-Facing Prompts

BACKGROUND

Although low-dose CT (LDCT) scan imaging lung cancer screening (LCS) can reduce lung cancer mortality, it remains underused. Shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended to assess the balance of benefits and harms for each patient.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Do clinician-facing electronic health record (EHR) prompts and an EHR-integrated everyday SDM tool designed to support routine incorporation of SDM into primary care improve LDCT scan imaging ordering and completion?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A preintervention and postintervention analysis was conducted in 30 primary care and four pulmonary clinics for visits with patients who met United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria for LCS. Propensity scores were used to adjust for covariates. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the expected benefit from screening (high benefit vs intermediate benefit), pulmonologist involvement (ie, whether the patient was seen in a pulmonary clinic in addition to a primary care clinic), sex, and race and ethnicity.

RESULTS

In the 12-month preintervention phase among 1,090 eligible patients, 77 patients (7.1%) had LDCT scan imaging orders and 48 patients (4.4%) completed screenings. In the 9-month intervention phase among 1,026 eligible patients, 280 patients (27.3%) had LDCT scan imaging orders and 182 patients (17.7%) completed screenings. Adjusted ORs were 4.9 (95% CI, 3.4-6.9; P < .001) and 4.7 (95% CI, 3.1-7.1; P < .001) for LDCT imaging ordering and completion, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed increases in ordering and completion for all patient subgroups. In the intervention phase, the SDM tool was used by 23 of 102 ordering providers (22.5%) and for 69 of 274 patients (25.2%) for whom LDCT scan imaging was ordered and who needed SDM at the time of ordering.

INTERPRETATION

Clinician-facing EHR prompts and an EHR-integrated everyday SDM tool are promising approaches to improving LCS in the primary care setting. However, room for improvement remains. As such, further research is warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRY

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04498052; URL: www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov.

Design and validation of indicators for the comprehensive measurement of quality of care for type 2 diabetes and acute respiratory infections in ambulatory health services

Developing ambulatory health services (AHS) of optimal quality is a pending issue for many health systems at a global level, especially in middle- and low-income countries. An effective health response requires indicators to measure the quality of care that are context-specific and feasible for routine monitoring. This paper aimed to design and validate indicators for assessing the technical and interpersonal quality dimensions for type 2 diabetes (T2D) and acute respiratory infections (ARI) care in AHS. The study was conducted in two stages. First, technical and user-centered-based indicators of quality of care for T2D and ARI care were designed following international recommendations, mainly from the American Diabetes Association standards and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. We then assessed the validity, reliability, relevance, and feasibility of the proposed indicators implementing the modified Delphi technique. A panel of 17 medical experts from five countries scored the indicators using two electronic questionnaires, one for each reason for consultation selected, sent by email in two sequential rounds of rating. We defined the levels of consensus according to the overall median for each performance category, which was established as the threshold. Selected indicators included those with scores equal to or higher than the threshold. We designed 36 T2D indicators, of which 16 were validated for measuring the detection of risks and complications, glycemic control, pharmacological treatment, and patient-centered care. Out of the 22 indicators designed for ARI, we validated 10 for diagnosis, appropriate prescription of antimicrobials, and patient-centered care. The validated indicators showed consistency for the dimensions analyzed. Hence, they proved to be a potentially reliable and valuable tool for monitoring the performance of the various T2D and ARI care processes in AHS. Further research will be needed to verify the applicability of the validated indicators in routine clinical practice.

Shared Decision-Making and Cardiovascular Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Shared decision-making is increasingly embraced in health care and recommended in cardiovascular guidelines. Patient involvement in health care decisions, patient-clinician communication, and models of patient-centered care are critical to improve health outcomes and to promote equity, but formal models and evaluation in cardiovascular care are nascent. Shared decision-making promotes equity by involving clinicians and patients, sharing the best available evidence, and recognizing the needs, values, and experiences of individuals and their families when faced with the task of making decisions. Broad endorsement of shared decision-making as a critical component of high-quality, value-based care has raised our awareness, although uptake in clinical practice remains suboptimal for a range of patient, clinician, and system issues. Strategies effective in promoting shared decision-making include educating clinicians on communication techniques, engaging multidisciplinary medical teams, incorporating trained decision coaches, and using tools (ie, patient decision aids) at appropriate literacy and numeracy levels to support patients in their cardiovascular decisions. This scientific statement shines a light on the limited but growing body of evidence of the impact of shared decision-making on cardiovascular outcomes and the potential of shared decision-making as a driver of health equity so that everyone has just opportunities. Multilevel solutions must align to address challenges in policies and reimbursement, system-level leadership and infrastructure, clinician training, access to decision aids, and patient engagement to fully support patients and clinicians to engage in the shared decision-making process and to drive equity and improvement in cardiovascular outcomes.

Shared decision-making in healthcare in mainland China: a scoping review

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) facilitates the participation of healthcare professionals and patients in treatment decisions. We conducted a scoping review to assess SDM's current status in mainland China, referencing the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF).

Methods

Our review encompassed extensive searches across six English and four Chinese databases, and various gray literature until April 30, 2021. Results were synthesized using thematic analysis.

Results

Out of the 60 included studies, we identified three key themes based on the ODSF framework: decisional needs, decision support, and decisional outcomes. However, there appears to be a lack of comprehensive understanding of concepts related to decisional needs in China. Only a few studies have delved into feasibility, preference, choice, and outcome factors in the SDM process. Another challenge emerges from an absence of uniform standards for developing patient decision aids (PDAs). Furthermore, regarding health outcome indicators, their predominant focus remains on physiological needs.

Conclusion

SDM is in its infancy in mainland China. It is important to explore the concept and expression of decisional needs in the context of Chinese culture. Subsequent studies should focus on constructing a scientifically rigorous and systematic approach for the development of PDAs, and considering the adaptation of SDM steps to the clinical context in China during SDM implementation. Concurrently, The focus on health outcomes in Chinese SDM studies, driven by the unique healthcare resource landscape, underscores the necessity of prioritizing basic needs within limited resources.

Systematic review registration

https://inplasy.com/?s=202130021.

Patient Decision Aid for Chemotherapy or Exclusion in Cisplatin-Intolerant Patients With Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer: Development, Alpha Testing, and Peer Validation

PURPOSE

In locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC), adding cisplatin to radiotherapy (RT) improves survival but increases toxicity. Among patients with cisplatin contraindications, RT compliance may be compromised by toxicity because of cisplatin or a substitute. In shared decision making, a patient decision aid (PtDA) may decrease decisional conflict and attitudinal barriers, thereby improving treatment compliance.

METHODS

Following International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) guidelines, a steering committee of two radiation oncologists, a gynecologic oncologist, an oncology nurse, a clinical psychologist, a cancer survivor, and a caregiver developed the chemotherapy or exclusion in cisplatin-intolerant patients with LACC (CECIL) prototype, a PtDA for cisplatin-intolerant patients with LACC deciding about adding chemotherapy to RT. The prototype was alpha-tested using the e-Delphi method. The patient decision aid research group Ottawa Acceptability Questionnaire was used to evaluate comprehensibility, length, amount of information, neutrality, and overall suitability for decision making. The prototype was then independently evaluated by local internal, local external, and international reviewers using the IPDAS checklist version 4, which encompasses information, probabilities, values, guidance, development, evidence, disclosure, plain language, and evaluation.

RESULTS

Alpha testing showed high practitioner acceptability (all items with mean and median scores ≥4; overall mean score 4.70 of 5.00) and good patient acceptability (all items rated good to excellent). Content validation showed that the PtDA satisfied all IPDAS six qualifying and six certification criteria, with high overall mean score (3.63 of 4.00) for all 17 applicable quality criteria.

CONCLUSION

The CECIL prototype shows good practitioner and patient acceptability, and content validity on peer review. Clinical testing to determine its effectiveness in reducing decisional conflict is ongoing.

Major influencing factors on routine implementation of shared decision-making in cancer care: qualitative process evaluation of a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) is highly relevant in oncology but rarely implemented in routine care. In a stepped-wedge cluster randomized implementation trial, the outcome evaluation of a theoretically and empirically based multi-component SDM implementation program did not show a statistically significant effect on patient-reported SDM uptake. Within this SDM implementation trial, a thorough a priori planned process evaluation was conducted. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate factors influencing SDM implementation in the context of a multi-component SDM implementation program.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative process evaluation of a stepped-wedge SDM implementation trial. Qualitative data included interviews with nurses and physicians of participating departments, field notes by the study team, and meeting minutes. Data were analyzed via deductive and inductive qualitative content analysis on basis of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

RESULTS

Transcripts of 107 interviews with 126 nurses and physicians, 304 pages of field note documentation, and 125 pages of meeting minutes were analyzed. Major factors influencing SDM implementation were found for all domains of the CFIR: a) four regarding characteristics of the individuals involved (e.g., perceived personal relevance, individual motivation to change), b) eleven regarding the inner setting (e.g., leadership engagement, networks and communication, available resources, compatibility with clinical practice), c) two regarding the outer setting (e.g., culture of health care delivery), d) eight regarding characteristics of the intervention (e.g., relative advantage, adaptability), and e) three regarding the implementation process (e.g., integration into existing structures). Furthermore, we found strong interrelations between several of the influencing factors within and between domains.

CONCLUSIONS

This comprehensive process evaluation complements the outcome evaluation of the SDM implementation trial and adds to its interpretation. The identified influencing factors can be used for planning, conducting, and evaluating SDM implementation in the future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03393351, registered 8 January 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03393351.

Perspectives of healthcare professionals and older patients on shared decision-making for treatment escalation planning in the acute hospital setting: a systematic review and qualitative thematic synthesis

Background

Shared Decision-Making (SDM) between patients and clinicians is increasingly considered important. Treament Escalation Plans (TEP) are individualised documents outlining life-saving interventions to be considered in the event of clinical deterioration. SDM can inform subjective goals of care in TEP but it remains unclear how much it is considered beneficial by patients and clinicians. We aimed to synthesise the existing knowledge of clinician and older patient (generally aged ≥65 years) perspectives on patient involvement in TEP in the acute setting.

Methods

Systematic database search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo and CINAHL databases as well as grey literature from database inception to June 8, 2023, using the Sample (older patients, clinicians, acute setting; studies relating to patients whose main diagnosis was cancer or single organ failure were excluded as these conditions may have specific TEP considerations), Phenomenon of Interest (Treatment Escalation Planning), Design (any including interview, observational, survey), Evaluation (Shared Decision-Making), Research type (qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods) tool. Primary data (published participant quotations, field notes, survey results) and descriptive author comments were extracted and qualitative thematic synthesis was performed to generate analytic themes. Quality assessment was made using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme and Mixed Methods Appraisal Tools. The GRADE-CERQual (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach was used to assess overall confidence in each thematic finding according to methodology, coherence, adequacy and relevance of the contributing studies. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO, CRD42022361593.

Findings

Following duplicate exclusion there were 1916 studies screened and ultimately 13 studies were included, all from European and North American settings. Clinician-orientated themes were: treatment escalation is a medical decision (high confidence); clinicians want the best for their patients amidst uncertainty (high confidence); involving patients and families in decisions is not always meaningful and can involve conflict (high confidence); treatment escalation planning exists within the clinical environment, organisation and society (moderate confidence). Patient-orientated themes were: patients' relationships with Treatment Escalation Planning are complex (low confidence); interactions with doctors are important but communication is not always easy (moderate confidence); patients are highly aware of their families when considering TEP (moderate confidence).

Interpretation

Based on current evidence, TEP decisions appear dominated by clinicians' perspectives, motivated by achieving the best for patients and challenged by complex decisions, communication and environmental factors; older patients' perspectives have seldom been explored, but their input on decisions may be modest. Presenting the context and challenge of SDM during professional education may allow reflection and a more nuanced approach. Future research should seek to understand what approach to TEP decision-making patients and clinicians consider to be optimum in the acute setting so that a mutually acceptable standard can be defined in policy.

Funding

HCA International and the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre.

"The Terminology Might Be Ahead of Practice": Embedding Shared Decision Making in Practice-Barriers and Facilitators to Implementation of SDM in the Context of Maternity Care

Background. It is a patient's right to be included in decisions about their health care. Implementing shared decision making (SDM) is important to enable active communication between clinicians and patients. Although health policy makers are increasingly mandating SDM implementation, SDM adoption has been slow. This study explored stakeholders' organizational- and system-level barriers and facilitators to implementing policy mandated SDM in maternity care in Victoria, Australia. Method. Twenty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants including clinicians, health service administrators and decision makers, and government policy makers. Data were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation. Results. Factors identified as facilitating SDM implementation included using a whole-of-system approach, providing additional implementation resources, correct documentation facilitated by electronic medical records, and including patient outcomes in measurement. Barriers included health service lack of capacity, unclear policy definitions of SDM, and policy makers' lack of resources to track implementation. Conclusion. This is the first study to our knowledge to explore barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation from the perspective of multiple actors following policy mandating SDM in tertiary health services in Australia. The primary finding was that there are concerns that SDM implementation policy is outpacing practice. Nonclinical staff play a crucial role translating policy to practice. Addressing organizational- and system-level barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation should be a key concern of health policy makers, health services, and staff.

Highlights

New government policies require shared decision making (SDM) implementation in hospitals.There is limited evidence for how to implement SDM in hospital settings.There are concerns SDM implementation policy is outpacing practice.Understanding and capacity for SDM varies considerably among stakeholders.Whole of system approaches and electronic medical records are seen to facilitate SDM.

Identifying most important contextual factors for the implementation of self-management interventions: A Delphi study

OBJECTIVE

To reach consensus amongst stakeholders about the most important contextual factors (CFs) that may influence the successful implementation of (components of) self-management interventions (SMIs) for type 2 diabetes, obesity, COPD and heart failure.

METHODS

Building on our literature review that identified 31 CFs on different levels we conducted a Delphi with 44 stakeholders to identify which of these CFs, or additional ones, contribute most to successful implementation of SMIs. The Delphi consisted of three rounds in which the CFs were scored, prioritized and discussed.

RESULTS

The most important CFs overlapped to a great extent across components of SMIs and diseases. Overall, stakeholders identified 'HCP's ability to adapt the advice, communication or intervention to patients' situation and level of knowledge' as most important CF.

CONCLUSION

CFs need to be taken into account when implementing promising SMIs. According to stakeholders, the most important CFs are patient-, HCP- or interaction related. 'Tailoring' was selected as the most crucial aspect for HCPs.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Stakeholders can make informed decisions on the adoption of the most suitable SMIs in a given context. These CFs are available through a self-management platform. Suggestions to implement self-management behaviour and to close the research-to-practice gap are made.

Patient Involvement in Decisions regarding Emergency Department Discharge: A Multimethod Study

Background

Unmet care needs and more than one reasonable discharge solution have been identified among patients in the emergency department. Less than half of the patients attending emergency care have reported being involved in decisions to the degree they have wanted. Having a person-centered approach, such as involving patients in decisions regarding their discharge, has been reported as being associated with beneficial outcomes for the patient.

Aim

The aim of the study was to explore the extent of patients' involvement in discharge planning in acute care and how patient involvement in decisions regarding discharge planning is managed in clinical practice.

Methods

A multimethod study, including both quantitative and qualitative data, was carried out. The quantitative part included a descriptive and comparative analysis of additional data from the patient's medical records and patient's responses to the CollaboRATE questionnaire. The qualitative part included a content analysis of notes from field studies of interactions between healthcare professionals and patients.

Results

A total of 615 patients from an emergency department at a medium-sized hospital completed the questionnaire. Roughly, a third gave top-box scores (36%), indicating optimal involvement in decisions. Two factors, being discharged home and not readmitted, were significantly associated with the experience of being involved. In clinical practice, there was a focus on symptoms, and diagnostic tools and choice of treatment were decisive for the further care trajectory of the patients. Speed and low continuity left limited opportunities for dialogue to uncover patients' preferences. At the same time, the patients did not expect to be involved.

Conclusions

Two out of three patients did not experience being involved in decisions regarding emergency department discharge. The interactions reflected an organizational structure in which the conditions for patient involvement were limited. Uncovering opportunities and initiatives to increase the number of patients who experience being involved in decisions is important tasks for the future.

Gender bias in shared decision-making among cancer care guidelines: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

In cancer care, the promotion and implementation of shared decision-making in clinical practice guidelines (CPG) and consensus statements may have potential differences by gender.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically analyse recommendations concerning shared decision-making in CPGs and consensus statements for the most frequent cancers exclusively among males (prostate) and females (endometrial).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We prospectively registered the protocol at PROSPERO (ID: RD42021241127). MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and online sources (8 guideline databases and 65 professional society websites) were searched independently by two reviewers, without language restrictions.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

CPGs and consensus statements about the diagnosis or treatment of prostate and endometrial cancers were included from January 2015 to August 2021.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Quality assessment deployed a previously developed 31-item tool and differences between the two cancers analysed.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 176 documents met inclusion criteria, 97 for prostate cancer (84 CPGs and 13 consensus statements) and 79 for endometrial cancer (67 CPGs and 12 consensus statements). Shared decision-making was recommended more often in prostate cancer guidelines compared to endometrial cancer (46/97 vs. 13/79, 47.4% vs. 16.5%; p < .001). Compared to prostate cancer guidelines (mean 2.14 items, standard deviation 3.45), compliance with the shared-decision-making 31-item tool was lower for endometrial cancer guidelines (mean 0.48 items, standard deviation 1.29) (p < .001). Regarding advice on the implementation of shared decision-making, it was only reported in 3 (3.8%) endometrial cancer guidelines and in 16 (16.5%) prostate cancer guidelines (p < .001).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

We observed a significant gender bias as shared decision-making was systematically more often recommended in the prostate compared to endometrial cancer guidelines. These findings should encourage new CPGs and consensus statements to consider shared decision-making for improving cancer care regardless of the gender affected.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The findings may inform future recommendations for professional associations and governments to update and develop high-quality clinical guidelines to consider patients' preferences and shared decision-making in cancer care.

Patient engagement in the development and delivery of healthcare services: a systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement (PE) is required to improve future healthcare services. PE in the development and delivery of healthcare services is likely to be complex but is scarcely described.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this scoping review was to summarise primary studies on mesolevel PE regarding structure, process and outcomes. More specifically, the aim was to explore barriers and facilitators to successful PE, how persons are engaged in the process and summarise reported consequences.

METHOD

A systematic scoping review was conducted, searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane and PsycINFO databases. Primary studies, published between 7 July 2005 and 4 October 2022, were considered for inclusion. Two reviewers extracted data about PE (eg, attributes of PE settings, facilitators and barriers, and outcomes to PE) and the first author coded the extracted data into structural, processual and outcome themes.

RESULTS

Of 8588 identified records, 37 studies were eligible. Most of the included studies were conducted in Europe (n=19; 51%) and North America (n=13; 35%). Structures that ensure sufficient stakeholder representativeness and PE knowledge through education may facilitate the PE process further, regardless of the environmental setting. Interpersonal relationships with uneven power dynamics were reported as noteworthy processual barriers to meaningful PE, while clearly described roles and tasks were reported as important facilitators. In contrast to hard outcomes with operationalised PE effects, the most noteworthy outcomes of PE were reported as soft processual consequences such as patient representatives improving their self-esteem and feeling valued.

CONCLUSIONS

Unfortunately, there is a dearth of studies exploring hard and operationalised PE outcomes on healthcare services and patients receiving healthcare. The PE process may be facilitated by dedicated finances to PE education and by ensuring sufficient stakeholder representativeness.

Patient involvement in medical decisions: a survey of shared decision making during physical therapy consultations

INTRODUCTION

Shared decision making (SDM) is widely affirmed as an ethical principle in healthcare; underpinned by both evidence of its positive outcomes among patients and strong inducements for its adoption by health professionals. This study investigated patients' involvement in SDM, determined its association with their personal characteristics and identified factors influencing their participation.

METHOD

A cross-sectional survey was executed among 148 consenting patients, who were recruited using convenience sampling technique and invited to complete self-report questionnaires on SDM. Data were analyzed via descriptive and inferential statistics.

RESULTS

Only 14 patients (9.5%) were involved in SDM whilst most patients (88.5%) had passive roles during consultation. SDM involvement had significant associations with age (p = .006) and educational status (p = .021). Most patients (67.6%) identified 'Doubt towards SDM,' as a factor that could hinder this collaborative process. Similarly, majority of the patients acknowledged the relevance of the influential factors: 'Physiotherapist's support' (83.7%) and 'Adequate health Information' (75%), toward promoting involvement in SDM.

CONCLUSION

Patient involvement in SDM was low in this study. Older and less/uneducated patients exhibited an increased tendency of noninvolvement. Key influential factors that either facilitate or hinder patients' involvement in SDM were revealed. There is a need to curtail drawbacks to SDM and promote its execution in physical therapy as well as general clinical practice.

Development and implementation of a decision aid for post-mastectomy breast reconstruction for Japanese women with breast cancer: a field-testing study

INTRODUCTION

Surgical options for post-mastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) have increased and become more diverse. These options may cause difficulty and stress for patients in making the best choice, and this also increases the likelihood of postoperative regret over a particular decision. To solve this issue, implementation of shared decision-making (SDM) using a decision aid (DA) has become of increasing interest. We have created the first prototype DA in Japan. The aim of the current field study was to assess the usability of this DA in promoting effective SDM and avoiding regret over a decision to undergo reconstructive surgery.

METHODS

A total of 25 consecutive patients who underwent BR were enrolled in the study, including 13 with SDM using the decision aid (DA + group) and 12 who received standard information (DA- group) before their choice of surgery. The Decision Regret Scale (DRS) were completed after PMBR, whereas SDM Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) was completed before PMBR. Descriptive and summary statistics were compared to identify differences between the two groups to assess the usability of the DA.

RESULTS

The DA + group had significantly higher mean total scores on the SDM-Q-9 (90.2 ± 5.3 vs. 84.1 ± 3.5, P = 0.0034) and DRS (90.3 ± 3.8 vs. 84.3 ± 6.7, P = 0.023), compared to those in the DA- group.

CONCLUSION

Use of the DA may cause patients to have a higher level of perceived SDM and less regret, which suggests that the DA helps to facilitate smooth and effective implementation of SDM. We conclude that this type of decision-making approach should be recommended for choice of surgery for PMBR.

Shared decision-making and the duration of medical consultations: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

1) determine whether increased levels of Shared Decision-Making (SDM) affect consultation duration, 2) investigate the intervention characteristics involved.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane library were systematically searched for experimental and cross-sectional studies up to December 2021. A best-evidence synthesis was performed, and interventions characteristics that increased at least one SDM-outcome, were pooled and descriptively analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixty-three studies were selected: 28 randomized clinical trials, 8 quasi-experimental studies, and 27 cross-sectional studies. Overall, pooling of data was not possible due to substantial heterogeneity. No differences in consultation duration were found more often than increased or decreased durations. . Consultation times (minutes:seconds) were significantly increased only among interventions that: 1) targeted clinicians only (Mean Difference [MD] 1:30, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0:24-2:37); 2) were performed in primary care (MD 2:05, 95%CI 0:11-3:59; 3) used a group format (MD 2:25, 95%CI 0:45-4:05); 4) were not theory-based (MD 4:01, 95%CI 0:38-7:23).

CONCLUSION

Applying SDM does not necessarily require longer consultation durations. Theory-based, multilevel implementation approaches possibly lower the risk of increasing consultation durations.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The commonly heard concern that time hinders SDM implementation can be contradicted, but implementation demands multifaceted approaches and space for training and adapting work processes.

Co-designing a theory-informed intervention to increase shared decision-making in maternity care

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) has been shown to improve healthcare outcomes and is a recognized right of patients. Policy requires health services to implement SDM. However, there is limited research into what interventions work and for what reasons. The aim of the study was to develop a series of interventions to increase the use of SDM in maternity care with stakeholders.

METHODS

Interventions to increase the use of SDM in the setting of pregnancy care were developed using Behaviour Change Wheel and Theoretical Domains Framework and building on findings of an in-depth qualitative study which were inductively analysed. Intervention development workshops involved co-design, with patients, clinicians, health service administrators and decision-makers, and government policy makers. Workshops focused on identifying viable SDM opportunities and tailoring interventions to the local context (the Royal Women's Hospital) and salient qualitative themes.

RESULTS

Pain management options during labour were identified by participants as a high priority for application of SDM, and three interventions were developed including patient and clinician access to the Victorian Government's maternity record via the patient portal and electronic medical records (EMR); a multi-layered persuasive communications campaign designed; and clinical champions and SDM simulation training. Factors identified by participants for successful implementation included having alignment with strategic direction of the service, support of leaders, using pre-standing resources and workflows, using clinical champions, and ensuring equity.

CONCLUSION

Three interventions co-designed to increase the use of SDM for pain management during labour address key barriers and facilitators to SDM in maternity care. This study exemplifies how health services can use behavioural science and co-design principles to increase the use of SDM. Insights into the co-design of interventions to implement SDM in routine practice provide a framework for other health services, policy makers and researchers.

"SDM:HOSP"- a generic model for hospital-based implementation of shared decision making

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is a core element in the meeting between patient and healthcare professionals, but has proved difficult to implement and sustain in routine clinical practice. One of five Danish regions set out to succeed and to develop a model that ensures lasting SDM based on learnings from large-scale real-world implementation initiatives that go beyond the 'barriers' and 'facilitators' research approach. This paper describes this process and development of a generic implementation model, SDM:HOSP.

METHODS

This project was carried out in the Region of Southern Denmark with five major hospital units. Based on existing theory of SDM, SDM implementation, implementation science and improvement methodology, a process of four phases were described; development of conceptual elements, field-testing, evaluation, and development of the final implementation model. The conceptual elements developed aimed to prepare leaders, train SDM teachers, teach clinicians to perform SDM, support development of patient decision aids, and support systematic planning, execution and follow-up. Field testing was done including continuous participant evaluations and an overall evaluation after one year.

RESULTS

Data from field testing and learnings from the implementation process, illustrated the need for a dynamic and easy adjustable model. The final SDM:HOSP model included four themes; i)Training of Leaders, ii) Training of Teachers and Clinicians, iii) Decision Helper, and iv) 'Process', each with details in three levels, 1) shared elements, 2) recommendations, and 3) local adaption.

CONCLUSIONS

A feasible and acceptable model for implementation of SDM across hospitals and departments that accounts for different organizations and cultures was developed. The overall design can easily be adapted to other organizations and can be adjusted to fit the specific organization and culture. The results from the ongoing and overall evaluation suggest promising avenues for future work in further testing and research of the usability of the model.

Supporting care engagement in primary care; the development of a maturity matrix

BACKGROUND

Care engagement or active patient involvement in healthcare contributes to the quality of primary care, but organisational preconditions in routine practice need to be aligned. A Maturity Matrix for Care Engagement to assess and discuss these preconditions in the general practice team was developed and tested on feasibility and acceptability in general practice.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

A systematic user-centred approach was applied, starting with a scoping literature search to describe the domains on the horizontal axis of the maturity matrix. The domains and growing steps (vertical axis) were refined by patients (n = 16) and general practice staff (n = 11) in three focus group discussions and reviewed by six experts (local facilitators and scientists). Seven domains could be distinguished: Personalised Care, Shared Decision Making, Self-Management, Patient as Partner, Supportive Means, Patient Environment, and Teamwork among Healthcare Professionals. The growing steps described three to six activities per domain (n = 32 in total) that contribute to care engagement. Local facilitators implemented the tool in two general practice teams according to a user guide, starting with a two-hour kick-off meeting on care engagement. In the next step, practitioners, nurses and assistants in each practice indicated their score on the domains individually. The scores were discussed in the facilitated practice meeting which was aimed at SMART improvement plans. Feasibility and acceptability were assessed in interviews showing that the tool was well received by the pilot practices, although the practice assistants had difficulties scoring some of the activities as they did not always relate to their daily work. An assessment after three months showed changes in practice organisation towards increased care engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

The maturity matrix on care engagement is a tool to identify the organisational practice maturity for care engagement. Suggested adaptations must be implemented before large-scale testing.