Involvement In Shared Decision Research Articles

Perspectives of residents on shared decision making in medication management: A qualitative study.

Shared decision making is the process in which the person, their representative, and health care professional share information with each other, participate in the decision-making process, and agree on a course of action. At present, very little is known about shared decision making (SDM) in medication management from the perspective of long-term care facility residents. The objective of this study was to identify residents' beliefs, motivation, and aspects of the environment that facilitate or impede SDM. A qualitative study was conducted using face-to-face semi-structured interviews, and data analysis was carried out using a thematic approach. Six long-term care facilities in Sydney, Australia. Thirty-one residents. Enablers to resident involvement in SDM were resident beliefs in exercising their right to take part in medication-related decisions, preference to maintain control over decisions, and motivation to raise concern about medication. Residents were not motivated to be involved in SDM if they believed they had no control over life circumstance, perceived that medications were necessary, or experienced no problems with their medications. Participation in SDM was hindered by limitations in opportunities for resident involvement, engagement with staff and primary care physician to discuss issues related to medications, and continuity of care with their regular physician. This study highlights that the residents' beliefs in control over decisions and concerns about medication are a significant function of the SDM process. It is important that residents are given the choice to take part in SDM, their beliefs and values regarding SDM are understood, and the culture of the care facility respects residents' right to participate in SDM.

Making sense of diabetes medication decisions: a mixed methods cluster randomized trial using a conversation aid intervention

PurposeTo determine the effectiveness of a shared decision-making (SDM) tool versus guideline-informed usual care in translating evidence into primary care, and to explore how use of the tool changed patient perspectives about diabetes medication decision making.MethodsIn this mixed methods multicenter cluster randomized trial, we included patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and their primary care clinicians. We compared usual care with or without a within-encounter SDM conversation aid. We assessed participant-reported decisions made and quality of SDM (knowledge, satisfaction, and decisional conflict), clinical outcomes, adherence, and observer-based patient involvement in decision-making (OPTION12-scale). We used semi-structured interviews with patients to understand their perspectives.ResultsWe enrolled 350 patients and 99 clinicians from 20 practices and interviewed 26 patients. Use of the conversation aid increased post-encounter patient knowledge (correct answers, 52% vs. 45%, p = 0.02) and clinician involvement of patients (Mean between-arm difference in OPTION12, 7.3 (95% CI 3, 12); p = 0.003). There were no between-arm differences in treatment choice, patient or clinician satisfaction, encounter length, medication adherence, or glycemic control. Qualitative analyses highlighted differences in how clinicians involved patients in decision making, with intervention patients noting how clinicians guided them through conversations using factors important to them.ConclusionsUsing an SDM conversation aid improved patient knowledge and involvement in SDM without impacting treatment choice, encounter length, medication adherence or improved diabetes control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Future interventions may need to focus specifically on patients with signs of poor treatment fit.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01502891.

Patients' perspective on shared decision-making in urology: a prospective study at a university hospital.

This study aims to determine the degree of shared decision-making (SDM) from urological patients' perspective and to identify possible predictors. Overall, 469 urological patients of a university outpatient clinic were recruited for this prospective study. Before a medical consultation, clinical and sociodemographic information, and patients' emotional distress were assessed by questionnaires. After the consultation, patients completed the SDM-Questionnaire-9 (SDM-Q-9). The SDM-Q-9 scores of relevant subgroups were compared. Logistic regression was used to identify patients at risk for experiencing low involvement (SDM-Q-9 total score ≤ 66) in SDM. Data from 372 patients were available for statistical analyses. The SDM-Q-9 mean total score was 77.8 ± 20.6. The majority of patients (n = 271, 73%) experienced a high degree of involvement (SDM-Q-9 total score > 66). The mean score per SDM-Q-9 item was in the upper range (3.9 ± 1.4 out of 5). The most poorly rated item was "My doctor wanted to know how I want to be involved in decision-making" (3.5 ± 1.6). Immigration status (OR 3.7, p = 0.049), and nonscheduled hospital registration (OR 2.1, p = 0.047) were significant predictors for less perceived involvement. Comorbidity, oncological status, and emotional distress did not significantly predict perceived participation. In a university hospital setting, most urological patients feel adequately involved in SDM. Nevertheless, urologists should routinely ask for patients' participation preference. Patients without a scheduled appointment and patients who immigrated may need more support to feel involved in SDM.

An Affective-Appraisal Approach for Parental Shared Decision Making in Children and Young People's Mental Health Settings: A Qualitative Study.

Background: The majority of existing shared decision making (SDM) models are yet to explicitly account for emotion as an influencing factor to the SDM process. This study aimed to explore the role of parents' and carers' emotional experiences as a concept that has implications for SDM in children and young people's mental health (CYPMH) settings.Methods: A social constructivist grounded theory approach, analyzing data from focus groups (n = 4) and semi-structured interviews (n = 33) with parents and healthcare professionals, was undertaken. Participants were identified and selected at CYPMH sites and through social media platforms or in-person advertising as part of a larger feasibility trial. Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis moved from open to focused coding.Results: The majority of the sample consisted of mothers of adolescent girls. Healthcare professionals had an average of 7.54 (SD = 6.24) years of work experience in CYPMH outpatient capacities. Findings suggested that parents are “expected to, but not always able to” engage in SDM. Themes and subthemes described an affective-appraisal SDM process capturing: (1) views and experiences of SDM, (2) parents' emotional states, (3) the influence of emotions on SDM, and (4) key support systems accessed. The emerging affective-appraisal framework highlighted that negative emotional states hindered parents' active involvement in SDM, and positive emotions encouraged involvement in SDM.Conclusion: The current findings describe an SDM model specific to CYPMH. This new understanding contributes to addressing a possible theory to practice gap opening new challenges and opportunities for academic enquiry.

Shared Decision Making in Practice and the Perspectives of Health Care Professionals on Video-Recorded Consultations With Patients With Low Health Literacy in the Palliative Phase of Their Disease.

Introduction. An important goal of palliative care is improving the quality of life of patients and their partners/families. To attain this goal, requirements and preferences of patients need to be discussed, preferably through shared decision making (SDM). This enhances patient autonomy and patient-centeredness, requiring active participation by patients. This is demanding for palliative patients, and even more so for patients with limited health literacy (LHL). This study aimed to examine SDM in practice and assess health care professionals’ perspectives on their own SDM. Methods. An explanatory sequential mixed methods design was used. Video recordings were gathered cross-sectionally of palliative care consultations with LHL patients (n = 36) conducted by specialized palliative care clinicians and professionals integrating a palliative approach. The consultations were observed for SDM using the OPTION5 instrument. Potential determinants of SDM were examined using multilevel analysis. Sequentially, stimulated recall interviews were conducted assessing the perspectives of professionals on their SDM (n = 19). Interviews were examined using deductive thematic content analysis. Results. The average SDM score in practice was moderate, varying greatly between professionals, as shown by the multilevel analysis and by varying degrees of perceived patient involvement in SDM mentioned in the interviews. To improve this, professionals recommended 1) continuously discussing all options with patients, 2) allowing time for patients to talk, and 3) using strategic timing for involving patients in SDM. Discussion. The implementation of SDM for people with LHL in palliative care varies in quality and needs improvement. SDM needs to be enhanced in this care domain because decisions are complex and demanding for LHL patients. Future research is needed that focuses on supporting strategies for comprehensible SDM, best practices, and organizational adaptations.

Effect of a Prostate Cancer Screening Decision Aid for African-American Men in Primary Care Settings.

African-American men have an elevated risk of developing and dying from prostate cancer. Shared decision-making (SDM) about prostate cancer screening is recommended but does not always occur. We pilot-tested an online decision aid (DA) in primary care settings using a pre/postevaluation design among African-American men ages 45 to 70 years. Men completed surveys before and after using the DA, which had interactive segments (e.g., values clarification) and provided individualized assessment of prostate cancer risk. Primary outcomes included prostate cancer knowledge, confidence in ability to make informed decisions, decisional conflict, and satisfaction with the decision. Immediately after the clinical visit, patients reported the degree to which they were engaged by their provider in SDM. Among this sample of men (n = 49), use of the DA was associated with increased knowledge about prostate cancer [mean = 55.3% vs. 71.2%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 9.8-22.1; P < 0.001], reduced decisional conflict (mean = 33.4 vs. 23.6; 95% CI, -18.1 to -1.6; P = 0.002) on a scale from 0 to 100, and a decreased preference to be screened (88% vs. 69%; 95% CI, 0.09-0.64; P = 0.01). Most (89%) reported that the DA prepared them well/very well for SDM with their provider. Following the clinical visit with providers, scores on perceived involvement in SDM were 68.1 (SD 29.1) on a 0 to 100 scale. The DA improved men's knowledge, reduced decisional conflict, and promoted the perception of being prepared for SDM. Findings suggest that use of an online DA to improve SDM outcomes warrants further testing in a future trial.

535: Patient decision aid for trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) versus planned repeat cesarean delivery(PRCD)

Given few eligible women attempt a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC), evidence-based tools are needed to guide patient-provider shared decision-making (SDM). Our objective was to assess the impact of a web-based patient decision aid (pDA) intervention on patient decision-making of TOLAC versus planned repeat cesarean delivery (PRCD). The Birth Decision Aid Study (B-READY) was a quasi-experimental study conducted between 7/2018 to 7/2019 with sequential enrollment of pregnant women (singleton pregnancies 19/0 to 36/6 weeks, ≤2 prior cesareans, and no contraindication to TOLAC) into standard care and pDA intervention groups. The pDA group viewed the web-based Healthwise® “Pregnancy: Birth Options After Cesarean” program, attended a birth options discussion visit with their obstetric provider, and completed an online SDM assessment. The standard care group received routine prenatal counseling on birth options and completed the SDM assessment. Outcomes were patient involvement in decision-making by the SDM Process Score, knowledge, satisfaction, and patient leaning towards mode of delivery. Eighty-five women enrolled in the study, 42 (49%) in the intervention pDA group and 43 (51%) in the standard care group. Groups did not differ by socio-demographics, obstetric provider type, number of prior cesareans, or desire for future pregnancies. Women in both groups reported similar involvement in SDM about mode of delivery (Table). The pDA group had greater knowledge (mean test score: 78% vs. 50%; p< 0.001) and better satisfaction with clarity of the information provided (p< 0.01) versus the standard care group. The pDA group was more likely to lean towards choosing PRCD than TOLAC (50% vs. 35%; p=0.03) and expressed greater readiness to decide about mode of delivery (95% vs. 81%; p=0.04) versus the standard care group. 97% of pDA users found it useful and would recommend it to other women. A web-based birth options pDA demonstrated increased patient involvement in decision-making about mode of delivery, including patient knowledge, satisfaction, and readiness to decide.View Large Image Figure ViewerDownload Hi-res image Download (PPT)

Glycemic control in type 2 diabetes: role of health literacy and shared decision-making.

Background: Improving glycemic control requires that patients actively participate in decisions about how to best live with the disease and adapt to the realities of self-care. Limited health literacy (HL) is related to poorer health outcomes and may make it difficult for patients to participate in shared decision-making (SDM). As such, understanding the relationship between HL and SDM and its impact on diabetes control is an urgent issue.Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among outpatients with type 2 diabetes in a regional teaching hospital. Purposive sampling was used to recruit eligible 372 patients via self-administered questionnaires. HbA1C values were obtained from each patient’s laboratory assay.Results: Among the 372 participants, 50.4% of patients preferred physician decision-making, 39.3% preferred SDM, and 10.3% preferred patient decision-making. The physician explaining the illness in colloquial language, having adequate time for discussion, and encouragement from the healthcare provider were the major factors influencing patients’ involvement in SDM. Interactive HL and critical HL had positive correlations with patients’ perceived involvement in SDM. Educational attainment and HL were positively related. The HbA1C values for patient decision-making and physician decision-making were approximately 1.4 times and 1.24 times higher than those of SDM, respectively.Conclusion: SDM led to better glycemic control. HL increased patients’ perceived involvement in SDM. Therefore, it is necessary to improve levels of HL based on the educational attainment of patients. Physicians explaining illness in colloquial language is the key factor in promoting patients’ perceived involvement in SDM.

Rasch Analysis of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire in Women With Breast Cancer.

Shared decision making (SDM) is a best practice to help patients make optimal decisions by a process of healthcare, especially for women diagnosed with breast cancer and having heavy burden in long-term treatments. To promote successful SDM, it is crucial to assess the level of perceived involvement in SDM in women with breast cancer. The aims of this study were to apply Rasch analysis to examine the construct validity and person reliability of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) in women with breast cancer. The construct validity of SDM-Q-9 was confirmed when the items fit the Rasch model's assumptions of unidimensionality: (1) infit and outfit mean square ranged from 0.6 to 1.4; (2) the unexplained variance of the first dimension of the principal component analysis was less than 20%. Person reliability was calculated. A total of 212 participants were recruited in this study. Item 1 did not fit the model's assumptions and was deleted. The unidimensionality of the remaining 8 items (SDM-Q-8) was supported with good item fit (infit and outfit mean square ranging from 0.6 to 1.3) and very low unexplained variance of the first dimension (5.3%) of the principal component analysis. The person reliability of the SDM-Q-8 was 0.90. The SDM-Q-8 was unidimensional and had good person reliability in women with breast cancer. The SDM-Q-8 has shown its potential for assessing the level of perceived involvement in SDM in women with breast cancer for both research and clinical purposes.

Effectiveness of the DECIDE Interventions on Shared Decision Making and Perceived Quality of Care in Behavioral Health With Multicultural Patients

Few randomized clinical trials have been conducted with ethnic/racial minorities to improve shared decision making (SDM) and quality of care. To test the effectiveness of patient and clinician interventions to improve SDM and quality of care among an ethnically/racially diverse sample. This cross-level 2 × 2 randomized clinical trial included clinicians at level 2 and patients (nested within clinicians) at level 1 from 13 Massachusetts behavioral health clinics. Clinicians and patients were randomly selected at each site in a 1:1 ratio for each 2-person block. Clinicians were recruited starting September 1, 2013; patients, starting November 3, 2013. Final data were collected on September 30, 2016. Data were analyzed based on intention to treat. The clinician intervention consisted of a workshop and as many as 6 coaching telephone calls to promote communication and therapeutic alliance to improve SDM. The 3-session patient intervention sought to improve SDM and quality of care. The SDM was assessed by a blinded coder based on clinical recordings, patient perception of SDM and quality of care, and clinician perception of SDM. Of 312 randomized patients, 212 (67.9%) were female and 100 (32.1%) were male; mean (SD) age was 44.0 (15.0) years. Of 74 randomized clinicians, 56 (75.7%) were female and 18 (4.3%) were male; mean (SD) age was 39.8 (12.5) years. Patient-clinician pairs were assigned to 1 of the following 4 design arms: patient and clinician in the control condition (n = 72), patient in intervention and clinician in the control condition (n = 68), patient in the control condition and clinician in intervention (n = 83), or patient and clinician in intervention (n = 89). All pairs underwent analysis. The clinician intervention significantly increased SDM as rated by blinded coders using the 12-item Observing Patient Involvement in Shared Decision Making instrument (b = 4.52; SE = 2.17; P = .04; Cohen d = 0.29) but not as assessed by clinician or patient. More clinician coaching sessions (dosage) were significantly associated with increased SDM as rated by blinded coders (b = 12.01; SE = 3.72; P = .001; Cohen d = 0.78). The patient intervention significantly increased patient-perceived quality of care (b = 2.27; SE = 1.16; P = .05; Cohen d = 0.19). There was a significant interaction between patient and clinician dosage (b = 7.40; SE = 3.56; P = .04; Cohen d = 0.62), with the greatest benefit when both obtained the recommended dosage. The clinician intervention could improve SDM with minority populations, and the patient intervention could augment patient-reported quality of care. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01947283.

Primary Care Physician Involvement in Shared Decision Making for Critically Ill Patients and Family Satisfaction with Care.

An intensive care unit (ICU) patient's primary care physician (PCP) may be able to assist family with certain ICU shared medical decisions. We explored whether families of patients in nonopen ICUs who nevertheless report involvement of a patient's PCP in medical decision making are more satisfied with ICU shared decision making than families who do not. Between March 2013 and December 2015, we administered the Family Satisfaction in the ICU 24 survey to family members of adult neuroscience ICU patients. We compared the mean score for the survey subsection regarding shared decision making (graded on a 100-point scale), as well as individual survey items, between those who reported the patient's PCP involvement in any medical decision making versus those who did not. Among 263 respondents, there was no difference in mean overall decision-making satisfaction scores for those who reported involvement (81.1; SD = 15.2) versus those who did not (80.1; SD = 12.8; P = .16). However, a higher proportion reporting involvement felt completely satisfied with their 1) inclusion in the ICU decision making process (75.9% vs 61.4%; P = .055), and 2) control over the care of the patient (73.6% vs 55.6%; P = .02), with no difference regarding consistency of clinical information provided by the medical team (64.8% vs 63.5%; P = 1.00). Families who report involvement of a patient's PCP in medical decision making for critically ill patients may be more satisfied than those who do not with regard to specific aspects of ICU decision making. Further research would help understand how best to engage PCPs in shared decisions.

Patients’ perception of their involvement in shared treatment decision making: Key factors in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

ObjectivesThis study aims to characterize the relationships between the quality of the information given by the physician, the involvement of the patient in shared decision making (SDM), and outcomes in terms of satisfaction and anxiety pertaining to the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). MethodsA Web survey was conducted among 200 Canadian patients affected with IBD. The theoretical model of SDM was adjusted using path analysis. SAS software was used for all statistical analyses. ResultsThe quality of the knowledge transfer between the physician and the patient is significantly associated with the components of SDM: information comprehension, patient involvement and decision certainty about the chosen treatment. In return, patient involvement in SDM is significantly associated with higher satisfaction and, as a result, lower anxiety as regards treatment selection. ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the importance of involving patients in shared treatment decision making in the context of IBD. Practice implicationsUnderstanding shared decision making may motivate patients to be more active in understanding the relevant information for treatment selection, as it is related to their level of satisfaction, anxiety and adherence to treatment. This relationship should encourage physicians to promote shared decision making.

Exploring emotions and the shared decision-making process in pediatric primary care

This paper aims to identify conversational interaction patterns in pediatrics with a focus on the shared decision-making process and dialogue about emotions in doctor–patient relationships. We documented conversations in 163 visits by 168 children in pediatric primary care; we observed, audiorecordered, transcribed and analyzed them with specific instruments of analysis of doctor patient relationship. Our survey was conducted in four pediatric primary care practices and 15 health providers were involved. The data collection period lasted three months and was undertaken twice a week on days. We analyzed visits with Verona Coding Definitions of Emotional Sequences (VR-CoDES) and Observing Patient Involvement in Shared Decision Making (OPTION) instruments. Frequencies of emotions’ signals (cues/concerns) obtained using VR-CoDES were analyzed and compared with the OPTION ratings. We documented 318 cues/concerns for parents and 167 for children. The relationship between cues/concerns and Healthcare Providers responses was strongest in dialogues between parents and pediatricians. The conversational patterns focused on the procedures of the care, with little opportunities of dialogue about emerging emotions. We also observed limited possibilities for participant involvement, especially by children, due to several difficulties integrating dialogue about emotions and concordance processes. The conversations seemed to be characterized by rarity of shared decision making or attention to the informational value of children’s emotions. It could be useful to implement psychological interventions to achieve an enrichment of the dialogue between participants, helping them to incorporate emotions into conversations and to recognize decisional competences, necessary to concordance processes.

PHS54 - The Impact of a Decision Aid on Depressed Patients’ Involvement in Shared Decision Making: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Double-Blinded Study

PHS54 - The Impact of a Decision Aid on Depressed Patients’ Involvement in Shared Decision Making: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Double-Blinded Study

Perceived involvement and preferences in shared decision-making among patients with hypertension.

Shared decision-making (SDM) is an important component of patient-centred care. However, there is limited information on its implementation in Malaysia, particularly in chronic diseases such as hypertension. The objective of this study was to examine perceived involvement and role preferences of patients with hypertension in treatment decision-making. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 210 patients with hypertension in a teaching hospital in Malaysia. The majority of respondents agreed that their doctor recognized that a decision needs to be made (89.5%) and informed them that different options are available (77.1%). However, respondents' perceived level of involvement in other aspects of treatment decision-making process was low, including in the selection of treatment and in reaching an agreement with their doctor on how to proceed with treatment. In terms of preferred decision-making roles, 51.4% of respondents preferred a collaborative role with their physicians, 44.8% preferred a passive role while only 1.9% preferred an active role. Age and educational level were found to be significantly related to patient preferences for involvement in SDM. Younger patients (<60 years) and those with higher educational level preferred SDM over passive decision-making (ρ < 0.01). Encouragement from health care providers was perceived as a major motivating factor for SDM among patients with hypertension, with 91% of respondents agreeing that this would motivate their participation in SDM. Preferences for involvement in decision-making among patients with hypertension are varied, and influenced by age and educational level. Physicians have a key role in encouraging patients to participate in SDM.

Older Patients’ Involvement in Shared Decision-Making—A Systematic Review

Shared decision-making has been described as allowing patients to gain more control over their life situation and feel less helpless. The aim of this systematic review was to describe the involvement of older patients in shared decision-making in community settings. In accordance with the systematic review method, a total of 2468 abstracts were read, after which nine quantitative studies were included. A qualitative thematic analysis was performed and two themes emerged; increased understanding of self-management and a desire to strengthen one’s position in relationship with professionals, both of which were essential for empowering older patients to participate in shared decision-making. Older patients’ shared decision-making was seen as a struggle to maintain their autonomy in different areas of everyday life. Emotional and psychological problems made their position more difficult. In order to empower them in relationships with healthcare professionals, older patients require more knowledge (self-efficacy) and information about their illness, which could strengthen their position in the decision-making process. They also need a greater awareness of decisional conflicts that may arise. Age, gender and health status influence older patients’ chance of being respected and taken seriously in relationship with professionals.

Occupational therapists’ shared decision-making behaviors with patients having persistent pain in a work rehabilitation context: A cross-sectional study

In a work rehabilitation context, we assessed occupational therapists’ (OTs) shared decision-making (SDM) behaviors with individuals having persistent pain and explored factors influencing SDM behaviors. A cross-sectional study that used audio-recordings of work rehabilitation consultations between OTs trained in SDM and a convenient sample of patients. Eligible patients were: off work for ≥ 12 weeks due to persistent pain associated with a musculoskeletal disorder, starting a work rehabilitation program, and French speaking. Transcripts were analyzed using the Observing Patient Involvement in Shared Decision-Making (OPTION) instrument and assessed patients’ decisional conflict and socioeconomic status. Of 15 OTs trained in SDM, 11 (90% female), provided audiotaped SDM meetings with 37 patients (40.5% female; aged 18–62 years). Their average OPTION score was 53.94 out of 100 (SD = 9.68; range: 35.42–70.83), indicating basic skills. Significant factors associated with OPTION scores ( R 2 adjusted = 21.7%) were the interview length ( P = .008) and level of patient education ( P = .038). Basic SDM behaviors were integrated in the practice of OTs trained in SDM. Evaluating SDM behaviors is a step toward providing OTs with performance feedback toward achieving client-centered care.

Critical Synthesis Package: OPTION (Observing Patient Involvement in Shared Decision Making)

Critical Synthesis Package: OPTION (Observing Patient Involvement in Shared Decision Making)

Novel Statistical Approach to Determine Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Patients' Perspectives on Shared Decision Making.

Limited information is available on patients' perspectives of shared decision-making practices used in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The aim of this study was to examine patient insights regarding shared decision making among patients with IBD using novel statistical technology to analyze qualitative data. Two 10-patient focus groups (10 ulcerative colitis patients and 10 Crohn's disease patients) were conducted in Chicago in January 2012 to explore patients' experiences, concerns, and preferences related to shared decision making. Key audio excerpts of focus group insights were embedded within a 25-min online patient survey and used for moment-to-moment affect trace analysis. A total of 355 IBD patients completed the survey (ulcerative colitis 51 %; Crohn's disease 49 %; female 54 %; 18-50 years of age 50 %). The majority of patients (66 %) reported increased satisfaction when they participated in shared decision making. Three unique patient clusters were identified based on their involvement in shared decision making: satisfied, content, and dissatisfied. Satisfied patients (18 %) had a positive physician relationship and a high level of trust with their physician. Content patients (48 %) had a moderate level of trust with their physician. Dissatisfied patients (34 %) had a life greatly affected by IBD, a low level of trust of their physician, a negative relationship with their physician, were skeptical of decisions, and did not rely on their physician for assistance. This study provides valuable insights regarding patients' perceptions of the shared decision-making process in IBD treatment using a novel moment-to-moment hybrid technology approach. Patient perspectives in this study indicate an increased desire for shared decision making in determining an optimal IBD treatment plan.

Occupational therapists’ shared decision-making behaviors with patients having persistent pain in a work rehabilitation context: A cross-sectional study

ObjectiveIn a work rehabilitation context, we assessed occupational therapists’ (OTs) shared decision-making (SDM) behaviors with individuals having persistent pain and explored factors influencing SDM behaviors. MethodsA cross-sectional study that used audio-recordings of work rehabilitation consultations between OTs trained in SDM and a convenient sample of patients. Eligible patients were: off work for ≥12 weeks due to persistent pain associated with a musculoskeletal disorder, starting a work rehabilitation program, and French speaking. Transcripts were analyzed using the Observing Patient Involvement in Shared Decision Making (OPTION) instrument and assessed patients’ decisional conflict and socioeconomic status. ResultsOf 15 OTs trained in SDM, 11 (90% female), provided audiotaped SDM meetings with 37 patients (40.5% female; aged 18–62 years). Their average OPTION score was 53.94 out of 100 (SD=9.68; range 35.42–70.83), indicating basic skills. Significant factors associated with OPTION scores (Radjusted2=21.7%) were the interview length (p=0.008) and level of patient education (p=0.038). ConclusionBasic SDM behaviors were integrated in the practice of OTs trained in SDM. Practice implicationsEvaluating SDM behaviors is a step toward providing OTs with performance feedback toward achieving client-centered care.