1
|
Visseren FLJ, Mach F, Smulders YM, Carballo D, Koskinas KC, Bäck M, Benetos A, Biffi A, Boavida JM, Capodanno D, Cosyns B, Crawford C, Davos CH, Desormais I, Di Angelantonio E, Franco OH, Halvorsen S, Hobbs FDR, Hollander M, Jankowska EA, Michal M, Sacco S, Sattar N, Tokgozoglu L, Tonstad S, Tsioufis KP, van Dis I, van Gelder IC, Wanner C, Williams B. 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Eur Heart J 2021; 42:3227-3337. [PMID: 34458905 DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab484] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2964] [Impact Index Per Article: 741.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
|
|
4 |
2964 |
2
|
Ommen SR, Mital S, Burke MA, Day SM, Deswal A, Elliott P, Evanovich LL, Hung J, Joglar JA, Kantor P, Kimmelstiel C, Kittleson M, Link MS, Maron MS, Martinez MW, Miyake CY, Schaff HV, Semsarian C, Sorajja P. 2020 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020; 76:e159-e240. [PMID: 33229116 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.08.045] [Citation(s) in RCA: 415] [Impact Index Per Article: 83.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
|
Practice Guideline |
5 |
415 |
3
|
Gulati M, Levy PD, Mukherjee D, Amsterdam E, Bhatt DL, Birtcher KK, Blankstein R, Boyd J, Bullock-Palmer RP, Conejo T, Diercks DB, Gentile F, Greenwood JP, Hess EP, Hollenberg SM, Jaber WA, Jneid H, Joglar JA, Morrow DA, O'Connor RE, Ross MA, Shaw LJ. 2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2021; 78:e187-e285. [PMID: 34756653 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.07.053] [Citation(s) in RCA: 401] [Impact Index Per Article: 100.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
AIM This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. STRUCTURE Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.
Collapse
|
Practice Guideline |
4 |
401 |
4
|
Virani SS, Newby LK, Arnold SV, Bittner V, Brewer LC, Demeter SH, Dixon DL, Fearon WF, Hess B, Johnson HM, Kazi DS, Kolte D, Kumbhani DJ, LoFaso J, Mahtta D, Mark DB, Minissian M, Navar AM, Patel AR, Piano MR, Rodriguez F, Talbot AW, Taqueti VR, Thomas RJ, van Diepen S, Wiggins B, Williams MS. 2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2023; 148:e9-e119. [PMID: 37471501 DOI: 10.1161/cir.0000000000001168] [Citation(s) in RCA: 390] [Impact Index Per Article: 195.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/22/2023]
Abstract
AIM The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease." METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. STRUCTURE This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.
Collapse
|
Practice Guideline |
2 |
390 |
5
|
Visseren FLJ, Mach F, Smulders YM, Carballo D, Koskinas KC, Bäck M, Benetos A, Biffi A, Boavida JM, Capodanno D, Cosyns B, Crawford C, Davos CH, Desormais I, Di Angelantonio E, Franco OH, Halvorsen S, Hobbs FDR, Hollander M, Jankowska EA, Michal M, Sacco S, Sattar N, Tokgozoglu L, Tonstad S, Tsioufis KP, van Dis I, van Gelder IC, Wanner C, Williams B. 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Eur J Prev Cardiol 2021; 29:5-115. [PMID: 34558602 DOI: 10.1093/eurjpc/zwab154] [Citation(s) in RCA: 267] [Impact Index Per Article: 66.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
|
|
4 |
267 |
6
|
Dehlendorf C, Krajewski C, Borrero S. Contraceptive counseling: best practices to ensure quality communication and enable effective contraceptive use. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2014; 57:659-73. [PMID: 25264697 PMCID: PMC4216627 DOI: 10.1097/grf.0000000000000059] [Citation(s) in RCA: 255] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
Improving the quality of contraceptive counseling is one strategy to prevent unintended pregnancy. We identify aspects of relational and task-oriented communication in family planning care that can assist providers in meeting their patients' needs. Approaches to optimizing women's experiences of contraceptive counseling include working to develop a close, trusting relationship with patients and using a shared decision-making approach that focuses on eliciting and responding to patient preferences. Providing counseling about side effects and using strategies to promote contraceptive continuation and adherence can also help optimize women's use of contraception.
Collapse
|
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
11 |
255 |
7
|
Couchoud C, Labeeuw M, Moranne O, Allot V, Esnault V, Frimat L, Stengel B. A clinical score to predict 6-month prognosis in elderly patients starting dialysis for end-stage renal disease. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2009; 24:1553-61. [PMID: 19096087 PMCID: PMC3094349 DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfn698] [Citation(s) in RCA: 223] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
AIM The aim of this study was to develop and validate a prognostic score for 6-month mortality in elderly patients starting dialysis for end-stage renal disease. METHODS Using data from the French Rein registry, we developed a prognostic score in a training sample of 2500 patients aged 75 years or older who started dialysis between 2002 and 2006, which we validated in a similar sample of 1642 patients. Multivariate logistic regression with 500 bootstrap samples allowed us to select risk factors from 19 demographic and baseline clinical variables. RESULTS The overall 6-month mortality was 19%. Age was not associated with early mortality. Nine risk factors were selected and points assigned for the score were as follows: body mass index <18.5 kg/m2 (2 points), diabetes (1), congestive heart failure stages III to IV (2), peripheral vascular disease stages III to IV (2), dysrhythmia (1), active malignancy (1), severe behavioural disorder (2), total dependency for transfers (3) and unplanned dialysis (2). The median score was 2. Mortality rates ranged from 8% in the lowest risk group (0 point) to 70% in the highest risk group (> or =9 points) and 17% in the median group (2 points). Seventeen percent of all deaths occurred after withdrawal from dialysis, ranging from 0% for a score of 0-1 to 15% for a score of 7 or higher. CONCLUSIONS This simple clinical score effectively predicts short-term prognosis among elderly patients starting dialysis. It should help to illuminate clinical decision making, but cannot be used to withhold dialysis. It ought to only be used by nephrologists to facilitate the discussion with the patients and their families.
Collapse
|
Randomized Controlled Trial |
16 |
223 |
8
|
Gulati M, Levy PD, Mukherjee D, Amsterdam E, Bhatt DL, Birtcher KK, Blankstein R, Boyd J, Bullock-Palmer RP, Conejo T, Diercks DB, Gentile F, Greenwood JP, Hess EP, Hollenberg SM, Jaber WA, Jneid H, Joglar JA, Morrow DA, O'Connor RE, Ross MA, Shaw LJ. 2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2021; 144:e368-e454. [PMID: 34709879 DOI: 10.1161/cir.0000000000001029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 207] [Impact Index Per Article: 51.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
AIM This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.
Collapse
|
Evaluation Study |
4 |
207 |
9
|
Ommen SR, Mital S, Burke MA, Day SM, Deswal A, Elliott P, Evanovich LL, Hung J, Joglar JA, Kantor P, Kimmelstiel C, Kittleson M, Link MS, Maron MS, Martinez MW, Miyake CY, Schaff HV, Semsarian C, Sorajja P. 2020 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020; 76:3022-3055. [PMID: 33229115 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.08.044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 173] [Impact Index Per Article: 34.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
AIM This executive summary of the hypertrophic cardiomyopathy clinical practice guideline provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to diagnose and manage hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in adult and pediatric patients as well as supporting documentation to encourage their use. METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 1, 2010, to April 30, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. STRUCTURE Many recommendations from the earlier hypertrophic cardiomyopathy guidelines have been updated with new evidence or a better understanding of earlier evidence. This summary operationalizes the recommendations from the full guideline and presents a combination of diagnostic work-up, genetic and family screening, risk stratification approaches, lifestyle modifications, surgical and catheter interventions, and medications that constitute components of guideline directed medical therapy. For both guideline-directed medical therapy and other recommended drug treatment regimens, the reader is advised to follow dosing, contraindications and drug-drug interactions based on product insert materials.
Collapse
|
Practice Guideline |
5 |
173 |
10
|
Boss EF, Mehta N, Nagarajan N, Links A, Benke JR, Berger Z, Espinel A, Meier J, Lipstein EA. Shared Decision Making and Choice for Elective Surgical Care: A Systematic Review. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2016; 154:405-20. [PMID: 26645531 PMCID: PMC4857133 DOI: 10.1177/0194599815620558] [Citation(s) in RCA: 156] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2015] [Accepted: 11/12/2015] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Shared decision making (SDM), an integrative patient-provider communication process emphasizing discussion of scientific evidence and patient/family values, may improve quality care delivery, promote evidence-based practice, and reduce overuse of surgical care. Little is known, however, regarding SDM in elective surgical practice. The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize findings of studies evaluating use and outcomes of SDM in elective surgery. DATA SOURCES PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SCOPUS electronic databases. REVIEW METHODS We searched for English-language studies (January 1, 1990, to August 9, 2015) evaluating use of SDM in elective surgical care where choice for surgery could be ascertained. Identified studies were independently screened by 2 reviewers in stages of title/abstract and full-text review. We abstracted data related to population, study design, clinical dilemma, use of SDM, outcomes, treatment choice, and bias. RESULTS Of 10,929 identified articles, 24 met inclusion criteria. The most common area studied was spine (7 of 24), followed by joint (5 of 24) and gynecologic surgery (4 of 24). Twenty studies used decision aids or support tools, including modalities that were multimedia/video (13 of 20), written (3 of 20), or personal coaching (4 of 20). Effect of SDM on preference for surgery was mixed across studies, showing a decrease in surgery (9 of 24), no difference (8 of 24), or an increase (1 of 24). SDM tended to improve decision quality (3 of 3) as well as knowledge or preparation (4 of 6) while decreasing decision conflict (4 of 6). CONCLUSION SDM reduces decision conflict and improves decision quality for patients making choices about elective surgery. While net findings show that SDM may influence patients to choose surgery less often, the impact of SDM on surgical utilization cannot be clearly ascertained.
Collapse
|
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
9 |
156 |
11
|
Stein A, Arnold D, Bridgewater J, Goldstein D, Jensen LH, Klümpen HJ, Lohse AW, Nashan B, Primrose J, Schrum S, Shannon J, Vettorazzi E, Wege H. Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared to observation after curative intent resection of cholangiocarcinoma and muscle invasive gallbladder carcinoma (ACTICCA-1 trial) - a randomized, multidisciplinary, multinational phase III trial. BMC Cancer 2015; 15:564. [PMID: 26228433 PMCID: PMC4520064 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1498-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 155] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2015] [Accepted: 06/18/2015] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite complete resection, disease-free survival (DFS) of patients with cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is less than 65 % after one year and not more than 35 % after three years. For muscle invasive gallbladder carcinoma (GBCA), prognosis is even worse, with an overall survival (OS) of only 30 % after three years. Thus, evaluation of adjuvant chemotherapy in biliary tract cancer in a large randomized trial is warranted. METHODS/DESIGN ACTICCA-1 is a randomized, multidisciplinary, multinational phase III investigator initiated trial. With respect to data obtained in the ABC-02 trial, we selected the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin for 24 weeks as investigational treatment. Based on adjuvant trials in pancreatic cancer with comparable postoperative recovery time, inclusion of patients within a maximum interval of 16 weeks between surgery and start of chemotherapy was stipulated. Due to the different prognosis and treatment susceptibility of muscle invasive carcinoma, two separate cohorts (CCA and GBCA) were included to capture the potentially different treatment effects. Randomization is stratified for lymph node status for both cohorts and localization for CCA. The primary endpoint is DFS and secondary endpoints include OS, safety and tolerability of chemotherapy, quality of life, and patterns of disease recurrence. For CCA, adjuvant chemotherapy should increase DFS 24 months post-surgery from 40 to 55 % to be considered relevant. With a power of 80 % and a significance level of 5 %, 271 evaluable study patients have to be followed for 24-28 months to observe 166 events. For GBCA, chemotherapy should increase DFS 24 months post-surgery from 35 to 55 % to be of relevance; thus, 154 evaluable study patients have to be monitored for 24-28 months to observe 90 events. In both cohorts, randomization will be 1:1 with chemotherapy for 24 weeks and imaging every twelve weeks. In 2014, the study was initiated in Germany and in The Netherlands (funded by the Deutsche Krebshilfe, the Dutch Cancer Society, and supported by medac GmbH). Sites in Australia, Denmark, and the United Kingdom (funded by Cancer Research UK) are joining 2015. TRIAL REGISTRATION The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02170090 ) and the European Clinical Trials Database (2012-005078-70). Registration date is 06/18/2014.
Collapse
|
Clinical Trial, Phase III |
10 |
155 |
12
|
Krones T, Keller H, Sönnichsen A, Sadowski EM, Baum E, Wegscheider K, Rochon J, Donner-Banzhoff N. Absolute cardiovascular disease risk and shared decision making in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Fam Med 2008; 6:218-27. [PMID: 18474884 PMCID: PMC2384995 DOI: 10.1370/afm.854] [Citation(s) in RCA: 146] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE We wanted to determine the effect of promoting the effective communication of absolute cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk and shared decision making through disseminating a simple decision aid for use in family practice consultations. METHODS The study was based on a pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial (phase III) with continuing medical education (CME) groups of family physicians as the unit of randomization. In the intervention arm, 44 physicians (7 CME groups) consecutively recruited 550 patients in whom cholesterol levels were measured. Forty-seven physicians in the control arm (7 CME groups) similarly included 582 patients. Four hundred sixty patients (83.6%) of the intervention arm and 466 patients (80.1%) of the control arm were seen at follow-up. Physicians attended 2 interactive CME sessions and received a booklet, a paper-based risk calculator, and individual summary sheets for each patient. Control physicians attended 1 CME-session on an alternative topic. Main outcome measures were patient satisfaction and participation after the index consultation, change in CVD risk status, and decisional regret at 6 months' follow-up. RESULTS Intervention patients were significantly more satisfied with process and result (Patient Participation Scale, difference 0.80, P<.001). Decisional regret was significantly lower at follow-up (difference 3.39, P = .02). CVD risk decreased in both groups without a significant difference between study arms. CONCLUSION A simple transactional decision aid based on calculating absolute individual CVD risk and promoting shared decision making in CVD prevention can be disseminated through CME groups and may lead to higher patient satisfaction and involvement and less decisional regret, without negatively affecting global CVD risk.
Collapse
|
Randomized Controlled Trial |
17 |
146 |
13
|
Virani SS, Newby LK, Arnold SV, Bittner V, Brewer LC, Demeter SH, Dixon DL, Fearon WF, Hess B, Johnson HM, Kazi DS, Kolte D, Kumbhani DJ, LoFaso J, Mahtta D, Mark DB, Minissian M, Navar AM, Patel AR, Piano MR, Rodriguez F, Talbot AW, Taqueti VR, Thomas RJ, van Diepen S, Wiggins B, Williams MS. 2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2023; 82:833-955. [PMID: 37480922 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2023.04.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 137] [Impact Index Per Article: 68.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/24/2023]
Abstract
AIM The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease." METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. STRUCTURE This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.
Collapse
|
Practice Guideline |
2 |
137 |
14
|
Ommen SR, Mital S, Burke MA, Day SM, Deswal A, Elliott P, Evanovich LL, Hung J, Joglar JA, Kantor P, Kimmelstiel C, Kittleson M, Link MS, Maron MS, Martinez MW, Miyake CY, Schaff HV, Semsarian C, Sorajja P. 2020 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2020; 142:e533-e557. [PMID: 33215938 DOI: 10.1161/cir.0000000000000938] [Citation(s) in RCA: 130] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Aim This executive summary of the hypertrophic cardiomyopathy clinical practice guideline provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to diagnose and manage hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in adult and pediatric patients as well as supporting documentation to encourage their use. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 1, 2010, to April 30, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Structure Many recommendations from the earlier hypertrophic cardiomyopathy guidelines have been updated with new evidence or a better understanding of earlier evidence. This summary operationalizes the recommendations from the full guideline and presents a combination of diagnostic work-up, genetic and family screening, risk stratification approaches, lifestyle modifications, surgical and catheter interventions, and medications that constitute components of guideline directed medical therapy. For both guideline-directed medical therapy and other recommended drug treatment regimens, the reader is advised to follow dosing, contraindications and drug-drug interactions based on product insert materials.
Collapse
|
Practice Guideline |
5 |
130 |
15
|
Kruser JM, Nabozny MJ, Steffens NM, Brasel KJ, Campbell TC, Gaines ME, Schwarze ML. "Best Case/Worst Case": Qualitative Evaluation of a Novel Communication Tool for Difficult in-the-Moment Surgical Decisions. J Am Geriatr Soc 2015; 63:1805-11. [PMID: 26280462 DOI: 10.1111/jgs.13615] [Citation(s) in RCA: 119] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate a communication tool called "Best Case/Worst Case" (BC/WC) based on an established conceptual model of shared decision-making. DESIGN Focus group study. SETTING Older adults (four focus groups) and surgeons (two focus groups) using modified questions from the Decision Aid Acceptability Scale and the Decisional Conflict Scale to evaluate and revise the communication tool. PARTICIPANTS Individuals aged 60 and older recruited from senior centers (n = 37) and surgeons from academic and private practices in Wisconsin (n = 17). MEASUREMENTS Qualitative content analysis was used to explore themes and concepts that focus group respondents identified. RESULTS Seniors and surgeons praised the tool for the unambiguous illustration of multiple treatment options and the clarity gained from presentation of an array of treatment outcomes. Participants noted that the tool provides an opportunity for in-the-moment, preference-based deliberation about options and a platform for further discussion with other clinicians and loved ones. Older adults worried that the format of the tool was not universally accessible for people with different educational backgrounds, and surgeons had concerns that the tool was vulnerable to physicians' subjective biases. CONCLUSION The BC/WC tool is a novel decision support intervention that may help facilitate difficult decision-making for older adults and their physicians when considering invasive, acute medical treatments such as surgery.
Collapse
|
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't |
10 |
119 |
16
|
Witteman HO, Dansokho SC, Colquhoun H, Coulter A, Dugas M, Fagerlin A, Giguere AM, Glouberman S, Haslett L, Hoffman A, Ivers N, Légaré F, Légaré J, Levin C, Lopez K, Montori VM, Provencher T, Renaud JS, Sparling K, Stacey D, Vaisson G, Volk RJ, Witteman W. User-centered design and the development of patient decision aids: protocol for a systematic review. Syst Rev 2015; 4:11. [PMID: 25623074 PMCID: PMC4328638 DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-11] [Citation(s) in RCA: 116] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2014] [Accepted: 12/29/2014] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Providing patient-centered care requires that patients partner in their personal health-care decisions to the full extent desired. Patient decision aids facilitate processes of shared decision-making between patients and their clinicians by presenting relevant scientific information in balanced, understandable ways, helping clarify patients' goals, and guiding decision-making processes. Although international standards stipulate that patients and clinicians should be involved in decision aid development, little is known about how such involvement currently occurs, let alone best practices. This systematic review consisting of three interlinked subreviews seeks to describe current practices of user involvement in the development of patient decision aids, compare these to practices of user-centered design, and identify promising strategies. METHODS/DESIGN A research team that includes patient and clinician representatives, decision aid developers, and systematic review method experts will guide this review according to the Cochrane Handbook and PRISMA reporting guidelines. A medical librarian will hand search key references and use a peer-reviewed search strategy to search MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, the ACM library, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar. We will identify articles across all languages and years describing the development or evaluation of a patient decision aid, or the application of user-centered design or human-centered design to tools intended for patient use. Two independent reviewers will assess article eligibility and extract data into a matrix using a structured pilot-tested form based on a conceptual framework of user-centered design. We will synthesize evidence to describe how research teams have included users in their development process and compare these practices to user-centered design methods. If data permit, we will develop a measure of the user-centeredness of development processes and identify practices that are likely to be optimal. DISCUSSION This systematic review will provide evidence of current practices to inform approaches for involving patients and other stakeholders in the development of patient decision aids. We anticipate that the results will help move towards the establishment of best practices for the development of patient-centered tools and, in turn, help improve the experiences of people who face difficult health decisions. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42014013241.
Collapse
|
research-article |
10 |
116 |
17
|
Fiks AG, Mayne SL, Karavite DJ, Suh A, O’Hara R, Localio AR, Ross M, Grundmeier RW. Parent-reported outcomes of a shared decision-making portal in asthma: a practice-based RCT. Pediatrics 2015; 135:e965-73. [PMID: 25755233 PMCID: PMC4379463 DOI: 10.1542/peds.2014-3167] [Citation(s) in RCA: 115] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/06/2015] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Electronic health record (EHR)-linked patient portals are a promising approach to facilitate shared decision-making between families of children with chronic conditions and pediatricians. This study evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, and impact of MyAsthma, an EHR-linked patient portal supporting shared decision-making for pediatric asthma. METHODS We conducted a 6-month randomized controlled trial of MyAsthma at 3 primary care practices. Families were randomized to MyAsthma, which tracks families' asthma treatment concerns and goals, children's asthma symptoms, medication side effects and adherence, and provides decision support, or to standard care. Outcomes included the feasibility and acceptability of MyAsthma for families, child health care utilization and asthma control, and the number of days of missed school (child) and work (parent). Descriptive statistics and longitudinal regression models assessed differences in outcomes between study arms. RESULTS We enrolled 60 families, 30 in each study arm (mean age 8.3 years); 57% of parents in the intervention group used MyAsthma during at least 5 of the 6 study months. Parents of children with moderate to severe persistent asthma used the portal more than others; 92% were satisfied with MyAsthma. Parents reported that use improved their communication with the office, ability to manage asthma, and awareness of the importance of ongoing attention to treatment. Parents in the intervention group reported that children had a lower frequency of asthma flares and intervention parents missed fewer days of work due to asthma. CONCLUSIONS Use of an EHR-linked asthma portal was feasible and acceptable to families and improved clinically meaningful outcomes.
Collapse
|
research-article |
10 |
115 |
18
|
Wei JT, Barocas D, Carlsson S, Coakley F, Eggener S, Etzioni R, Fine SW, Han M, Kim SK, Kirkby E, Konety BR, Miner M, Moses K, Nissenberg MG, Pinto PA, Salami SS, Souter L, Thompson IM, Lin DW. Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: AUA/SUO Guideline Part I: Prostate Cancer Screening. J Urol 2023; 210:46-53. [PMID: 37096582 PMCID: PMC11060750 DOI: 10.1097/ju.0000000000003491] [Citation(s) in RCA: 110] [Impact Index Per Article: 55.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2023] [Accepted: 04/12/2023] [Indexed: 04/26/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The summary presented herein covers recommendations on the early detection of prostate cancer and provides a framework to facilitate clinical decision-making in the implementation of prostate cancer screening, biopsy, and follow-up. This is Part I of a two-part series that focuses on prostate cancer screening. Please refer to Part II for discussion of initial and repeat biopsies as well as biopsy technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS The systematic review utilized to inform this guideline was conducted by an independent methodological consultant. The systematic review was based on searches in Ovid MEDLINE and Embase and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (January 1, 2000-November 21, 2022). Searches were supplemented by reviewing reference lists of relevant articles. RESULTS The Early Detection of Prostate Cancer Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based guideline statements to provide guidance in prostate cancer screening, initial and repeat biopsy, and biopsy technique. CONCLUSIONS Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based prostate cancer screening in combination with shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended. Current data regarding risk from population-based cohorts provide a basis for longer screening intervals and tailored screening, and the use of available online risk calculators is encouraged.
Collapse
|
research-article |
2 |
110 |
19
|
Gulati M, Levy PD, Mukherjee D, Amsterdam E, Bhatt DL, Birtcher KK, Blankstein R, Boyd J, Bullock-Palmer RP, Conejo T, Diercks DB, Gentile F, Greenwood JP, Hess EP, Hollenberg SM, Jaber WA, Jneid H, Joglar JA, Morrow DA, O'Connor RE, Ross MA, Shaw LJ. 2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2021; 144:e368-e454. [PMID: 34709928 DOI: 10.1161/cir.0000000000001030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 105] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
AIM This executive summary of the clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. These guidelines present an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.
Collapse
|
Practice Guideline |
4 |
105 |
20
|
Thamer M, Kaufman JS, Zhang Y, Zhang Q, Cotter DJ, Bang H. Predicting Early Death Among Elderly Dialysis Patients: Development and Validation of a Risk Score to Assist Shared Decision Making for Dialysis Initiation. Am J Kidney Dis 2015; 66:1024-32. [PMID: 26123861 PMCID: PMC4658211 DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2015.05.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 102] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2015] [Accepted: 05/05/2015] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A shared decision-making tool could help elderly patients with advanced chronic kidney disease decide about initiating dialysis therapy. Because mortality may be high in the first few months after initiating dialysis therapy, incorporating early mortality predictors in such a tool would be important for an informed decision. Our objective is to derive and validate a predictive risk score for early mortality after initiating dialysis therapy. STUDY DESIGN Retrospective observational cohort, with development and validation cohorts. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS US Renal Data System and claims data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for 69,441 (aged ≥67 years) patients with end-stage renal disease with a previous 2-year Medicare history who initiated dialysis therapy from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2010. CANDIDATE PREDICTORS Demographics, predialysis care, laboratory data, functional limitations, and medical history. OUTCOMES All-cause mortality in the first 3 and 6 months. ANALYTICAL APPROACH Predicted mortality by logistic regression. RESULTS The simple risk score (total score, 0-9) included age (0-3 points), low albumin level, assistance with daily living, nursing home residence, cancer, heart failure, and hospitalization (1 point each), and showed area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC)=0.69 in the validation sample. A comprehensive risk score with additional predictors was also developed (with AUROC=0.72, high concordance between predicted vs observed risk). Mortality probabilities were estimated from these models, with the median score of 3 indicating 12% risk in 3 months and 20% in 6 months, and the highest scores (≥8) indicating 39% risk in 3 months and 55% in 6 months. LIMITATIONS Patients who did not choose dialysis therapy and did not have a 2-year Medicare history were excluded. CONCLUSIONS Routinely available information can be used by patients with chronic kidney disease, families, and their nephrologists to estimate the risk of early mortality after dialysis therapy initiation, which may facilitate informed decision making regarding treatment options.
Collapse
|
Observational Study |
10 |
102 |
21
|
Brown EA, Bargman J, van Biesen W, Chang MY, Finkelstein FO, Hurst H, Johnson DW, Kawanishi H, Lambie M, de Moraes TP, Morelle J, Woodrow G. Length of Time on Peritoneal Dialysis and Encapsulating Peritoneal Sclerosis - Position Paper for ISPD: 2017 Update. Perit Dial Int 2018; 37:362-374. [PMID: 28676507 DOI: 10.3747/pdi.2017.00018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 95] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2017] [Accepted: 04/04/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
|
Review |
7 |
95 |
22
|
Peek ME, Wilson SC, Gorawara-Bhat R, Odoms-Young A, Quinn MT, Chin MH. Barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making among African-Americans with diabetes. J Gen Intern Med 2009; 24:1135-9. [PMID: 19578818 PMCID: PMC2762499 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-009-1047-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 93] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2008] [Revised: 05/20/2009] [Accepted: 06/04/2009] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Shared decision-making (SDM) between patients and their physicians is associated with improved diabetes health outcomes. African-Americans have less SDM than Whites, which may contribute to diabetes racial disparities. To date, there has been little research on SDM among African-Americans. OBJECTIVE We explored the barriers and facilitators to SDM among African-Americans with diabetes. METHODS Qualitative research design with a phenomenological methodology using in-depth interviews (n = 24) and five focus groups (n = 27). Each interview/focus group was audio-taped and transcribed verbatim, and coding was conducted using an iterative process. PARTICIPANTS We utilized a purposeful sample of African-American adult patients with diabetes. All patients had insurance and received their care at an academic medical center. RESULTS Patients identified multiple SDM barriers/facilitators, including the patient/provider power imbalance that was perceived to be exacerbated by race. Patient-related factors included health literacy, fear/denial, family experiences and self-efficacy. Reported physician-related barriers/facilitators include patient education, validating patient experiences, medical knowledge, accessibility and availability, and interpersonal skills. DISCUSSION Barriers/facilitators of SDM exist among African-Americans with diabetes, which can be effectively addressed in the outpatient setting. Primary care physicians, particularly academic internists, may be uniquely situated to address these barriers/facilitators and train future physicians to do so as well.
Collapse
|
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
16 |
93 |
23
|
Gjerberg E, Lillemoen L, Førde R, Pedersen R. End-of-life care communications and shared decision-making in Norwegian nursing homes--experiences and perspectives of patients and relatives. BMC Geriatr 2015; 15:103. [PMID: 26286070 PMCID: PMC4544816 DOI: 10.1186/s12877-015-0096-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 92] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2015] [Accepted: 07/22/2015] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Involving nursing home patients and their relatives in end-of-life care conversations and treatment decisions has recently gained increased importance in several Western countries. However, there is little knowledge about how the patients themselves and their next-of-kin look upon involvement in end-of-life care decisions. The purpose of this paper is to explore nursing home patients' and next-of-kin's experiences with- and perspectives on end-of-life care conversations, information and shared decision-making. METHODS The study has a qualitative and explorative design, based on a combination of individual interviews with 35 patients living in six nursing homes and seven focus group interviews with 33 relatives. The data was analysed applying a "bricolage" approach". Participation was based on informed consent, and the study was approved by the Regional Committees for Medical and Health Research Ethics. RESULTS Few patients and relatives had participated in conversations about end-of-life care. Most relatives wanted such conversations, while the patients' opinions varied. With some exceptions, patients and relatives wanted to be informed about the patient's health condition. The majority wanted to be involved in the decision-making process, but leave the final decisions to the health professionals. Among the patients, the opinion varied; some patients wanted to leave the decisions more or less completely to the nursing home staff. Conversations about end-of-life care issues are emotionally challenging, and very few patients had discussed these questions with their family. The relatives' opinions of the patient's preferences were mainly based on assumptions; they had seldom talked about this explicitly. Both patients and relatives wanted the staff to raise these questions. CONCLUSION Nursing home staff should initiate conversations about preferences for end-of-life care, assisting patients and relatives in talking about these issues, while at the same time being sensitive to the diversity in opinions and the timing for such conversations. As the popularity of advance care planning increases in many Western countries, discussions of patients' and relatives' perspectives will be of great interest to a broader audience.
Collapse
|
research-article |
10 |
92 |
24
|
Yin HS, Dreyer BP, Vivar KL, MacFarland S, van Schaick L, Mendelsohn AL. Perceived barriers to care and attitudes towards shared decision-making among low socioeconomic status parents: role of health literacy. Acad Pediatr 2012; 12:117-24. [PMID: 22321814 PMCID: PMC3747780 DOI: 10.1016/j.acap.2012.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 89] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2011] [Revised: 12/24/2011] [Accepted: 01/01/2012] [Indexed: 10/14/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Although low parent health literacy (HL) has been linked to poor child health outcomes, it is not known whether differences in perceptions related to access to care and provider-parent partnership in care are potential contributing factors. We sought to assess whether parent HL is associated with differences in perceived barriers to care and attitudes regarding participatory decision-making with the provider. METHODS This was a cross-sectional analysis of data collected from parents presenting with their child to an urban public hospital pediatric clinic in New York City. Dependent variables were caregiver-reported barriers to care (ability to reach provider at night/on weekends, difficult travel to clinic) and attitudes towards participatory decision-making (feeling like a partner, relying on doctor's knowledge, leaving decisions up to the doctor, being given choices/asked opinion). The primary independent variable was caregiver HL (Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults [S-TOHFLA]). RESULTS A total of 823 parents were assessed; 1 in 4 (27.0%) categorized as having low HL. Parents with low HL were more likely to report barriers to care than those with adequate HL: trouble reaching provider nights/weekends, 64.9% vs. 49.6%, (p < 0.001, adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.7, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.2-2.4); difficult travel, 15.3% vs. 8.0%, (p = 0.004, AOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-3.0). Low HL was also associated with not feeling like a partner (28.8% vs. 17.1%; AOR 2.0; 95% CI 1.4-3.0), preference for relying on the doctor's knowledge (68.9% vs. 52.2%; AOR 1.7; 95% CI 1.2-2.4), and preference for leaving decisions up to the doctor (57.7% vs. 33.3%; AOR 2.2; 95% CI 1.6-3.1). CONCLUSIONS Addressing issues of parent HL may be helpful in ameliorating barriers to care and promoting provider-parent partnership in care.
Collapse
|
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural |
13 |
89 |
25
|
Damman OC, Jani A, de Jong BA, Becker A, Metz MJ, de Bruijne MC, Timmermans DR, Cornel MC, Ubbink DT, van der Steen M, Gray M, van El C. The use of PROMs and shared decision-making in medical encounters with patients: An opportunity to deliver value-based health care to patients. J Eval Clin Pract 2020; 26:524-540. [PMID: 31840346 PMCID: PMC7155090 DOI: 10.1111/jep.13321] [Citation(s) in RCA: 87] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2019] [Revised: 08/26/2019] [Accepted: 09/29/2019] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The recent emphasis on value-based health care (VBHC) is thought to provide new opportunities for shared decision-making (SDM) in the Netherlands, especially when using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in routine medical encounters. It is still largely unclear about how PROMs could be linked to SDM and what we expect from clinicians in this respect. AIM To describe approaches and lessons learned in the fields of SDM and VBHC implementation that converge in using PROMs in medical encounters. APPROACH Based on input from three Dutch forerunner case examples and available evidence about SDM and VBHC, we describe barriers and facilitators regarding the use of PROMs and SDM in the medical encounter. Barriers and facilitators were structured according to a conversational model that included monitoring and managing, team talk, option talk, choice talk, and decision talk. Key lessons learned and recommendations were synthesized. RESULTS The use of individual, N = 1 PROMs scores in the medical encounter has been largely achieved in the forerunner projects. Conversation on monitoring and managing is relatively well implemented, and option talk to some extent, unlike team talk, and decision talk. Aggregated PROMs information describing outcomes of treatment options seemed to be scarcely used. Experienced barriers largely corresponded to what is known from the literature, eg, perceived lack of time and lack of tools summarizing the options. Some concerns were identified about increasing health care consumption as a result of using PROMs and SDM in the medical encounter. CONCLUSION Successful implementation of SDM within VBHC initiatives may not be self-evident, even though individual, N = 1 PROMs scores are being used in the medical encounter. Education and staff resources on meso and macro levels may facilitate the more time-consuming SDM aspects. It seems fruitful to especially target team talk and choice talk in redesigning clinical pathways.
Collapse
|
research-article |
5 |
87 |