Dataset Information

Systematic review of shared decision-making interventions for people living with chronic respiratory diseases.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Shared decision-making (SDM) supports patients to make informed and value-based decisions about their care. We are developing an intervention to enable healthcare professionals to support patients' pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) decision-making. To identify intervention components we needed to evaluate others carried out in chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs). We aimed to evaluate the impact of SDM interventions on patient decision-making (primary outcome) and downstream health-related outcomes (secondary outcome).

Design

We conducted a systematic review using the risk of bias (Cochrane ROB2, ROBINS-I) and certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) tools.

Data sources

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCHINFO, CINAHL, PEDRO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal, ClinicalTrials.gov, PROSPERO, ISRCTN were search through to 11th April 2023.

Eligibility criteria

Trials evaluating SDM interventions in patients living with CRD using quantitative or mixed methods were included.

Data extraction and synthesis

Two independent reviewers extracted data, assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence. A narrative synthesis, with reference to The Making Informed Decisions Individually and Together (MIND-IT) model, was undertaken.

Results

Eight studies (n=1596 (of 17 466 citations identified)) fulfilled the inclusion criteria.Five studies included components targeting the patient, healthcare professionals and consultation process (demonstrating adherence to the MIND-IT model). All studies reported their interventions improved patient decision-making and health-related outcomes. No outcome was reported consistently across studies. Four studies had high risk of bias, three had low quality of evidence. Intervention fidelity was reported in two studies.

Conclusions

These findings suggest developing an SDM intervention including a patient decision aid, healthcare professional training, and a consultation prompt could support patient PR decisions, and health-related outcomes. Using a complex intervention development and evaluation research framework will likely lead to more robust research, and a greater understanding of service needs when integrating the intervention within practice.

Prospero registration number

CRD42020169897.

SUBMITTER: Barradell AC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10163462 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic review of shared decision-making interventions for people living with chronic respiratory diseases.

Barradell Amy C AC Gerlis Charlotte C Houchen-Wolloff Linzy L Bekker Hilary L HL Robertson Noelle N Singh Sally J SJ

BMJ open 20230502 5

<h4>Objective</h4>Shared decision-making (SDM) supports patients to make informed and value-based decisions about their care. We are developing an intervention to enable healthcare professionals to support patients' pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) decision-making. To identify intervention components we needed to evaluate others carried out in chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs). We aimed to evaluate the impact of SDM interventions on patient decision-making (primary outcome) and downstream health- ...[more]

PMID: 37130669

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess Arabic-speaking patients' preference for involvement in decision-making in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and characterise people who preferred involvement in decision-making.DesignCross-sectional quantitative study. The conduct and reporting of this research complied with Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines for cross-sectional studies.SettingParticipants were recruited from outpatient clinics of 10 major hospitals in four cities in the UAE: Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah and Umm al Quwain.ParticipantsAdult patients with at least one chronic disease completed a cross-sectional survey consisting of 37 items in six sections measuring variables that may influence preferred involvement in decision-making. These included health literacy, health status, unanswered questions about care and satisfaction with treatment decisions. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the predictors of patients' preferred involvement in decision-making.ResultsA total of 516 participants completed the survey. One-in-four participants preferred shared decision-making. Preferred involvement in decision-making was more frequent among women, not married, unemployed, people who rarely/never had unanswered questions and participants with anxiety/depression symptoms. After adjustment, not being married (OR=1.634; 95% CI 1.049 to 2.544) remained as a predictor of preferred involvement in decision-making, while having unanswered questions (OR=0.612; 95% CI 0.393 to 0.954) and problems in self-care were predictors of a preference for paternalistic decision-making (OR=0.423; 95% CI 0.181 to 0.993).ConclusionsContrary to the results from Western countries, this study showed that a majority of Arabic-speaking patients with chronic diseases preferred a paternalistic decision-making model. At the same time, some subgroups of Arabic-speaking people (eg, women, unemployed patients) had a higher preference for participation in decision-making. Physicians' support and changes in healthcare systems are required to foster Arabic-speaking patients' involvement in treatment decision-making process.

Project description:Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) in mental healthcare has received increased attention as a process to reinforce person-centered care. With the rapid development of digital health technology, researchers investigate how digital interventions may be utilized to support SDM. Despite the promise of digital interventions to support SDM, the effect of these in mental healthcare has not been evaluated before. Thus, this paper aims to assess the effect of SDM interventions complimented by digital technology in mental healthcare. Objective: The objective of this review was to systematically examine the effectiveness of digital SDM interventions on patient outcomes as investigated in randomized trials. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on digital SDM interventions for people with a mental health condition. We searched for relevant studies in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The search strategy included terms relating to SDM, digital systems, mental health conditions, and study type. The primary outcome was patient activation or indices of the same (e.g., empowerment and self-efficacy), adherence to treatment, hospital admissions, severity of symptoms, and level of functioning. Secondary outcomes were satisfaction, decisional conflict, working alliance, usage, and adherence of medicine; and adverse events were defined as harms or side effects. Results: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria with outcome data from 2,400 participants. Digital SDM interventions had a moderate positive effect as compared with a control condition on patient activation [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.56, CI: 0.10, 1.01, p = 0.02], a small effect on general symptoms (SMD = -0.17, CI: -0.31, -0.03, p = 0.02), and working alliance (SMD = 0.21, CI: 0.02, 0.41, p = 0.03) and for improving decisional conflict (SMD = -0.37, CI: -0.70, -0.05, p = 0.02). No effect was found on self-efficacy, other types of mental health symptoms, adverse events, or patient satisfaction. A total of 39 outcomes were narratively synthesized with results either favoring the intervention group or showing no significant differences between groups. Studies were generally assessed to have unclear or high risk of bias, and outcomes had a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) rating of low- or very low-quality evidence. Conclusions: Digital interventions to support SDM may be a promising tool in mental healthcare; but with the limited quality of research, we have little confidence in the estimates of effect. More quality research is needed to further assess the effectiveness of digital means to support SDM but also to determine which digital intervention features are most effective to support SDM. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42020148132.

Project description:BackgroundThe Chronic Care Model is an effective framework for improving chronic disease management. There is scarce literature describing this model for people living with HIV. Decision Support (DS) and Clinical Information Systems (CIS) are two components of this model that aim to improve care by changing health care provider behavior.ObjectiveOur aim was to assess the effectiveness of DS and CIS interventions for individuals with HIV, through a systematic literature review.DesignWe performed systematic electronic searches from 1996 to February 2011 of the medical (E.g. Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL) and grey literature. Effectiveness was measured by the frequency of statistically significant outcome improvement. Data and key equity indicator extraction and synthesis was completed.Participants and interventionsWe included comparative studies of people living with HIV that examined the impact of DS or CIS interventions on outcomes.Main measuresThe following measures were assessed: outcome (immunological/virological, medical, psychosocial, economic measures) and health care process/performance measures.Key resultsRecords were screened for relevance (n?=?10,169), full-text copies of relevant studies were obtained (n?=?123), and 16 studies were included in the review. Overall, 5/9 (55.6%) and 17/41 (41.5%) process measures and 5/12 (41.7%) and 3/9 (33.3%) outcome measures for DS and CIS interventions, respectively, were statistically significantly improved. DS-explicit mention of implementation of guidelines and CIS-reminders showed the most frequent improvement in outcomes. DS-only interventions were more effective than CIS-only interventions in improving both process and outcome measures. Clinical, statistical and methodological heterogeneity among studies precluded meta-analysis. Primary studies were methodologically weak and often included multifaceted interventions that made assessment of effectiveness challenging.ConclusionsOverall, DS and CIS interventions may modestly improve care for people living with HIV, having a greater impact on process measures compared to outcome measures. These interventions should be considered as part of strategies to improve HIV care through changing provider performance.

Dataset Information

Systematic review of shared decision-making interventions for people living with chronic respiratory diseases.

Objective

Design

Data sources

Eligibility criteria

Data extraction and synthesis

Results

Conclusions

Prospero registration number

Publications

Systematic review of shared decision-making interventions for people living with chronic respiratory diseases.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets