Shared Decision-making Training Research Articles

Implementing shared decision-making on acute psychiatric wards: a cluster-randomized trial with inpatients suffering from schizophrenia (SDM-PLUS).

Although shared decision-making (SDM) has the potential to improve health outcomes, psychiatrists often exclude patients with more severe mental illnesses or more acute conditions from participation in treatment decisions. This study examines whether SDM is facilitated by an approach which is specifically adapted to the needs of acutely ill patients (SDM-PLUS). The study is a multi-centre, cluster-randomised, non-blinded, controlled trial of SDM-PLUS in 12 acute psychiatric wards of five psychiatric hospitals addressing inpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. All patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were consecutively recruited for the trial at the time of their admission to the ward. Treatment teams of intervention wards were trained in the SDM-PLUS approach through participation in two half-day workshops. Patients on intervention wards received group training in SDM. Staff (and patients) of the control wards acted under 'treatment as usual' conditions. The primary outcome parameter was the patients' perceived involvement in decision-making at 3 weeks after study enrolment, analysed using a random-effects linear regression model. In total, 161 participants each were recruited in the intervention and control group. SDM-PLUS led to higher perceived involvement in decision-making (primary outcome, analysed patients n = 257, mean group difference 16.5, 95% CI 9.0-24.0, p = 0.002, adjusted for baseline differences: β 17.3, 95% CI 10.8-23.6, p = 0.0004). In addition, intervention group patients exhibited better therapeutic alliance, treatment satisfaction and self-rated medication compliance during inpatient stay. There were, however, no significant improvements in adherence and rehospitalisation rates in the 6- and 12-month follow-up. Despite limitations in patient recruitment, the SDM-PLUS trial has shown that the adoption of behavioural approaches (e.g. motivational interviewing) for SDM may yield a successful application to mental health. The authors recommend strategies to ensure effects are not lost at the interface between in- and outpatient treatment.Trial registration: The trial was registered at Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien (DRKS00010880).

Training Interventions to Equip Health Care Professionals With Shared Decision-Making Skills: A Systematic Scoping Review.

To support the development, implementation, and evaluation of shared decision-making (SDM) training programs, this article maps the relevant evidence in terms of training program design and content as well as evaluation outcomes. A systematic scoping review methodology was used. To identify studies, the databases PubMed, Medline, and CINAHL were searched from 2009 to 2019, and reference lists of included studies were examined. After removal of duplicates, 1367 articles were screened for inclusion. To be included, studies were to be published in peer-reviewed journals, and should not merely be descriptive but report on evaluation outcomes. Articles were reviewed for inclusion by both authors, and data were extracted using a purposely designed data charting form implemented using REDCap. The review identified 49 studies evaluating 36 unique SDM training programs. There was considerable variation in terms of program design and duration. Most programs included an overview of SDM theories and key competencies, as well as SDM skill development through role plays. Few programs provided training in reflective practice, in identifying and working with patients' individually preferred decision-making style, or in relation to SDM in a context of medical uncertainty or ambiguity. Most programs were evaluated descriptively, mostly using mixed methods, and there were 18 randomized controlled trials, showing that training was feasible, well received, and improved participants' knowledge and skills, but was limited in its impact on patients. Although there is limited capacity to comment on which types of training programs are most effective, overall training was feasible, well received, and improved participants' knowledge and skills.

Shared Decision-Making Training in Internal Medicine: A Multisite Intervention Study.

Research shows that when patients and health care providers share responsibility for clinical decisions, both patient satisfaction and quality of care increase, and resource use decreases. Yet few studies have assessed how to train residents to use shared decision-making (SDM) in their practice. We developed and evaluated a SDM training program in internal medicine. Senior internal medicine residents from 3 hospitals in Switzerland were assessed shortly before and 2 months after completing a program that included a 2-hour workshop and pocket card use in clinical practice. Encounters with standardized patients (SPs) were recorded and SDM performance was assessed using a SDM completeness rating scale (scores ranging from 0 to 100), a self-reported questionnaire, and SPs rating the residents. Of 39 eligible residents, 27 (69%) participated. The mean (SD) score improved from 65 (SD 13) to 71 (SD 12; effect size [ES] 0.53; P = .011). After training, participants were more comfortable with their SDM-related knowledge (ES 1.42, P < .001) and skills (ES 0.91, P < .001), and with practicing SDM (ES 0.96, P < .001). Physicians applied SDM concepts more often in practice (ES 0.71, P = .001), and SPs felt more comfortable with how participants discussed their care (ES 0.44, P = .031). The SDM training program improved the competencies of internal medicine residents and promoted the use of SDM in clinical practice. The approach may be of interest for teaching SDM to residents in other disciplines and to medical students.

Medical Students' Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Shared Decision Making: Results From a Multinational, Cross-Sectional Survey.

Introduction. We aimed to conduct a multinational cross-sectional online survey of medical students’ attitudes toward, knowledge of, and experience with shared decision making (SDM). Methods. We conducted the survey from September 2016 until May 2017 using the following: 1) a convenience sample of students from four medical schools each in Canada, the United States, and the Netherlands (n = 12), and 2) all medical schools in the United Kingdom through the British Medical School Council (n = 32). We also distributed the survey through social media. Results. A total of 765 students read the information sheet and 619 completed the survey. Average age was 24, 69% were female. Mean SDM knowledge score was 83.6% (range = 18.8% to 100%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 82.8% to 84.5%). US students had the highest knowledge scores (86.2%, 95% CI = 84.8% to 87.6%). The mean risk communication score was 57.4% (range = 0% to 100%; 95% CI = 57.4% to 60.1%). Knowledge did not vary with age, race, gender, school, or school year. Attitudes were positive, except 46% believed SDM could only be done with higher educated patients, and 80.9% disagreed that physician payment should be linked to SDM performance (increased with years in training, P < 0.05). Attitudes did not vary due to any tested variable. Students indicated they were more likely than experienced clinicians to practice SDM (72.1% v. 48.8%). A total of 74.7% reported prior SDM training and 82.8% were interested in learning more about SDM. Discussion. SDM knowledge is high among medical students in all four countries. Risk communication is less well understood. Attitudes indicate that further research is needed to understand how medical schools deliver and integrate SDM training into existing curricula.

Strategies to evaluate healthcare provider trainings in shared decision-making (SDM): a systematic review of evaluation studies

Design and objectivesWe performed a systematic review of studies evaluating healthcare provider (HCP) trainings in shared decision-making (SDM) to analyse their evaluation strategies.Setting and participantsHCP trainings in SDM from all...

Engaging Caregivers in Health-Related Housing Decisions for Older Adults With Cognitive Impairment: A Cluster Randomized Trial.

Background and ObjectivesInformal caregivers are rarely as involved as they want to be in the housing decisions of cognitively impaired older adults. Lack of awareness of available options and their benefits and risks may lead to decisions that do not reflect older adults’ preferences, and to guilt and regret. We assessed the effect of training home care teams in interprofessional shared decision-making (SDM) on the proportion of caregivers who report being active in this decision.Research Design and MethodsIn a two-arm pragmatic cluster randomized trial with home care teams working in health centers in the Province of Quebec, we randomized health centers to receive training in interprofessional SDM (intervention) or not (control). Eligible caregivers had made a housing decision for a cognitively impaired adult aged 65 years or older who was receiving services from a home care team. The primary outcome was the proportion of caregivers reporting an active role in decision making. We performed intention-to-treat multilevel analysis.ResultsWe consecutively enrolled a random group of 16 health centers and recruited 309 caregivers, among whom 296 were included in the analysis. In the intervention arm, the proportion of caregivers reporting an active role in decision making increased by 12% (95% CI −2% to 27%; p = .10). After removal of an influential cluster outlier, the proportion increased to 18% (95% CI: 7%–29%; p < .01).Discussion and ImplicationsTraining home care teams in interprofessional SDM increased caregiver involvement in health-related housing decisions for cognitively impaired older adults.

Evaluating shared decision-making in periviable counseling using objective structured clinical examinations.

To develop and test an Objective Structured Clinical Examination to evaluate the use of shared decision-making (SDM) in periviable counseling among fourth-year OB/GYN residents. Residents counseled a standardized patient presenting with preterm premature rupture of membranes at 23 weeks' gestation. Braddock's 9-item measure of SDM was adapted to a 10-item scoring rubric; rating each: 0 (absent), 1 (partial), or 2 (complete). Twenty-six residents participated. All provided "complete" discussions of the clinical issue and "complete" or 'partial' ratings for informing the woman of her prognosis (62 and 38%, respectively) and addressing her role in decision-making (42 and 50%). Discussions of her goals and preferences were often absent (69 and 62%). Only 42% discussed uncertainties. Critical elements of SDM related to a woman's values, goals and preferences were not explored when counseling about periviable delivery. Training in SDM is needed to advance communication skills for complex clinical decision-making.

The Development and Evaluation of Personalized Training in Shared Decision-making Skills for Rheumatologists.

Many factors influence a patient's preference in engaging in shared decision making (SDM). Several training programs have been developed for teaching SDM to physicians, but none of them focused on the patients' preferences. We developed an SDM training program for rheumatologists with a specific focus on patients' preferences and assessed its effects. A training program was developed, pilot tested, and given to 30 rheumatologists. Immediately after the training and 10 weeks later, rheumatologists were asked to complete a questionnaire to evaluate the training. Patients were asked before and after the training to complete a questionnaire on patient satisfaction. Ten weeks after the training, 57% of the rheumatologists felt they were capable of estimating the need of patients to engage in SDM, 62% felt their communication skills had improved, and 33% reported they engaged more in SDM. Up to 268 patients were included. Overall, patient satisfaction was high, but there were no statistically significant differences in patient satisfaction before and after the training. The training was received well by the participating rheumatologists. Even in a population of rheumatologists that communicates well, 62% reported improvement. The training program increased awareness about the principles of SDM in patients and physicians, and improved physicians' communicative skills, but did not lead to further improvement in patients' satisfaction, which was already high.

Study protocol of a randomized controlled trial on two new dissemination strategies for a brief, shared-decision-making (SDM) training for oncologists: web-based interactive SDM online-training versus individualized context-based SDM face-to-face training

BackgroundOncological patients often feel left out of important treatment decisions. However, when physicians engage them in shared decision-making (SDM), patients benefit in many ways and the situation is improved. SDM can effectively be taught to physicians, but participation barriers for SDM physician group trainings are high, making it hard to convince physicians to participate.With this in mind, we aim to develop and evaluate two new dissemination strategies for a brief, SDM training program based upon a proven SDM group-training concept: an individualized context-based SDM face-to-face training (IG I) and a web-based interactive SDM online training (IG II).We aim to analyze which improvements can be achieved by IG I and II compared to a control group (CG) in physician SDM competence and performance as well as the impact on the physician-patient relationship. Furthermore, we analyze differences in satisfaction concerning the two dissemination strategies by means of a training evaluation.Methods/designWe examine – based on a three-armed randomized controlled trial (IG I, IG II, CG) – the effectiveness of two new dissemination strategies for a SDM training program compared to a CG receiving no SDM training (voluntary access to SDM training as an incentive for participation after completion of the study). We aim to include 162 physicians randomized to one of the three arms. There will be two assessment points in time (before intervention: T0 and post-training: T1). The main outcome is the SDM competence of physicians as measured by an established observational assessment rating system (OPTION-12) by means of consultations with Standardized Patients. Standardized Patients are individuals trained to act as “real” patients. Secondary outcome measures are the SDM performance (SDM-Q-9) and the Questionnaire on the Quality of Physician-Patient-Interaction (QQPPI) both rated by Standardized Patients as well as the physicians’ training evaluation.DiscussionThis trial will assess the effectiveness and acceptability of two new dissemination strategies for a brief, SDM training program for physicians. Opportunities and challenges regarding implementation in daily routines will be discussed.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02674360. Prospectively registered on 4 February 2016.

Assessing Shared Decision-Making Clinical Behaviors Among Genetic Counsellors.

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a collaborative approach in which clinicians educate, support, and guide patients as they make informed, value-congruent decisions. SDM improves patients' health-related outcomes through increasing knowledge, reducing decisional conflict, and enhancing experience of care. We measured SDM in genetic counselling appointments with 27 pregnant women who were at increased risk to have a baby with a genetic abnormality. The eight experienced genetic counsellors who participated had no specific SDM training and were unaware that SDM was being assessed. Audio transcripts of appointments were scored using 'Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making' (OPTION12). Patients' anxiety and decisional conflict were also assessed. The genetic counsellors' mean OPTION12 score was 42.4% (SD 9.0%; possible range 0-100%). Specific SDM behaviours that scored highest included introducing the concept of equipoise and listing all options with their pros and cons. Behaviours that scored lowest included eliciting patients' preferred approach to receiving information and desired degree of involvement in decision-making. Patients' levels of anxiety and decisional conflict were unassociated with genetic counsellors' OPTION12 scores. Some SDM behaviours were better demonstrated in this prenatal genetic counselling study than others. Formal training of genetic counsellors in SDM may enhance use of this approach in their professional practice.

US-based cross-sectional survey of clinicians’ knowledge and attitudes about shared decision-making across healthcare professions and specialties

ObjectiveIn this study, we aim to compare shared decision-making (SDM) knowledge and attitudes between US-based physician assistants (PAs), nurse practitioners (NPs) and physicians across surgical and family medicine specialties.SettingWe administered...

Formal Shared Decision-Making Training and Evaluation Tools for OBGYN Residency Curriculum

Formal Shared Decision-Making Training and Evaluation Tools for OBGYN Residency Curriculum

The Impact of a Shared Decision-Making Training Program on Dementia Care Planning in Long-Term Care.

Shared decision-making (SDM) can be a way for staff to adopt international recommendations advocating the involvement of nursing home residents and their family members in care planning and the development of personalized care plans. The main aim was to analyze the effects of training nursing home staff in the implementation of SDM on agreement of residents' 'life-and-care plans' with the recommendations (primary outcome) and on family caregivers' quality of life and sense of competence, and staff's job satisfaction (secondary outcomes). In the intervention condition, staff attended a training program on the use of SDM with residents and family caregivers in the care planning process. In the control condition, care planning as usual took place. For the primary outcome, in-depth qualitative and quantitative analyses of the care plans were performed. Multivariate Permutation Tests were applied to assess the impact on secondary outcomes. Forty-nine residents and family caregivers and 34 professionals were involved. Overall, many of the care plans developed during the intervention showed a high level of agreement with the care planning recommendations. Both Italian and Dutch care plans showed improvement in the number of clear problem statements (p < 0.001). In Italy, significant improvements (p < 0.05) were also found regarding specific care objectives, documentation of objectives met, and of residents and families' involvement. No impact was found on secondary outcomes. The involvement of residents and family caregivers in care planning contributed to an improvement of the residents' care plans, but it did not have an effect on family caregivers and staff outcomes.

Training for Medical Oncologists on Shared Decision-Making About Palliative Chemotherapy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Systemic treatment for advanced cancer offers uncertain and sometimes limited benefit, while the burden can be high. This study examines the effect of shared decision-making (SDM) training for medical oncologists on observed SDM in standardized patient assessments. A randomized controlled trial comparing training with standard practice was conducted. Medical oncologists and oncologists-in-training (n = 31) participated in a video-recorded, standardized patient assessment at baseline (T0) and after 4 months (T1, after training). The training was based on a four-stage SDM model and consisted of a reader, two group sessions (3.5 hours each), a booster session (1.5 hours), and a consultation card. The primary outcome was observed SDM as assessed with the Observing Patient Involvement scale (OPTION12) coded by observers blinded for arm. Secondary outcomes were observed SDM per stage, communication skills, and oncologists' satisfaction with communication. The training had a significant and large effect on observed SDM in the simulated consultations (Cohen's f = 0.62) and improved observed SDM behavior in all four SDM stages (f = 0.39-0.72). The training improved oncologists' information provision skills (f = 0.77), skills related to anticipating/responding to emotions (f = 0.42), and their satisfaction with the consultation (f = 0.53). Training medical oncologists in SDM about palliative systemic treatment improves their performance in simulated consultations. The next step is to examine the effect of such training on SDM in clinical practice and on patient outcomes. Systemic treatment for advanced cancer offers uncertain and sometimes limited benefit, while the burden can be high. Hence, applying the premises of shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended. SDM is increasingly advocated based on the ethical imperative to provide patient-centered care and the increasing evidence for beneficial patient outcomes. Few studies examined the effectiveness of SDM training in robust designs. This randomized controlled trial demonstrated that SDM training (10 hours) improves oncologists' performance in consultations with standardized patients. The next step is to examine the effect of training on oncologists' performance and patient outcomes in clinical practice.

Post-training Shared Decision Making Barriers and Facilitators for Pediatric Healthcare Providers: A Mixed-Methods Study

ObjectiveTo assess barriers to and facilitators of shared decision making (SDM) for pediatric healthcare providers (HCPs) after they have been trained in SDM. MethodsA mixed methods study using triangulation of data sources. Pediatric HCPs with SDM training who worked at a Canadian tertiary care pediatric hospital were eligible. Participants completed a validated SDM barriers survey (n = 60) and a semi-structured interview (n = 11). We calculated descriptive statistics. Univariate and multivariable ordinary least squares linear regression models determined predictors of HCPs’ intention to use SDM. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. We analyzed qualitative data using deductive and inductive content analyses and organized categories according to the Ottawa Model of Research Use. ResultsIntention to use SDM was high (mean score = 5.6/7, SD = 0.78) and positively correlated with SDM use (RR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.18-1.81). However, 52% of survey respondents reported not using SDM after training. HCPs identified factors influencing SDM at the levels of innovation, adopter, environment, and training. Insufficient time (barrier) and buy-in and agreement with SDM (facilitators) were most commonly cited. To improve SDM use, HCPs want a more team-based approach to SDM training, continuing education, and implementation. ConclusionsDespite training and positive intentions, many HCPs report not subsequently using SDM and identified numerous post-training barriers to its use. To overcome SDM barriers and improve uptake, HCPs recommend creating a socially supportive environment through a team-based approach to SDM training and implementation. These findings can inform SDM training and implementation interventions at pediatric health care centers.

Community pharmacists' perspectives on shared decision-making in diabetes management.

Shared decision-making (SDM) is an approach where patients and clinicians share evidence and patients are supported to deliberate options resulting in preference-based informed decisions. The aim of this study was to describe community pharmacists' perceptions and awareness of SDM within their provision of general diabetes management [including Ontario's MedsCheck for Diabetes (MCD) programme], and potential challenges of implementing SDM within community pharmacy. This qualitative study used semistructured interviews with a convenience sample of community pharmacists. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. We conducted 16 interviews. Six participants were male, and nine were certified diabetes educators. When providing a MCD, participants used aspects of a patient-centred approach focusing on providing education. Variation was evident in participants' description and use of SDM, as well as in their perceived level of training in SDM. Participants also highlighted challenges surrounding implementing a SDM approach in practice. Pharmacists are well positioned to apply SDM within community settings; however, implementation barriers exist. Pharmacists will require additional training as well as perceived patient and physician barriers should be addressed to encourage uptake.

How participatory action research changed our view of the challenges of shared decision-making training

ObjectiveThis paper aims to demonstrate how the use of participatory action research (PAR) helped us identify ways to respond to communication challenges associated with shared decision-making (SDM) training. MethodsPatients, relatives, researchers, and health professionals were involved in a PAR process that included: (1) two theatre workshops, (2) a pilot study of an SDM training module involving questionnaires and evaluation meetings, and (3) three reflection workshops. ResultsThe PAR process revealed that health professionals often struggled with addressing existential issues such as concerns about life, relationships, meaning, and ability to lead responsive dialogue. Following the PAR process, a communication programme that included communication on existential issues and coaching was drafted. ConclusionBy involving multiple stakeholders in a comprehensive PAR process, valuable communication skills addressing a broader understanding of SDM were identified. A communication programme aimed to enhance skills in a mindful and responsive clinical dialogue on the expectations, values, and hopes of patients and their relatives was drafted. Practical implicationsBefore integrating new communication concepts such as SDM in communication training, research methods such as PAR can be used to improve understanding and identify the needs and priorities of both patients and health professionals.

Training surgeons in shared decision-making with cancer patients aged 65 years and older: a pilot study.

ObjectiveTreatment decision-making in older patients with colorectal (CRC) or pancreatic cancer (PC) needs improvement. We introduced the EASYcare in Geriatric Onco-surgery (EASY-GO) intervention to optimize the shared decision-making (SDM) process among these patients.MethodsThe EASY-GO intervention comprised a working method with geriatric assessment and SDM training for surgeons. A non-equivalent control group design was used. Newly diagnosed CRC/PC patients aged ≥65 years were included. Primary patient-reported experiences were the quality of SDM (SDM-Q-9, range 0–100), involvement in decision-making (Visual Analog Scale for Involvement in the decision-making process [range 0–10]), satisfaction about decision-making (Visual Analog Scale for Satisfaction concerning the decision-making process [range 0–10]), and decisional regret (Decisional Regret Scale [DRS], range 0–100). Only for DRS, lower scores are better.ResultsA total of 71.4% of the involved consultants and 42.9% of the involved residents participated in the EASY-GO training. Only 4 trained surgeons consulted patients both before (n=19) and after (n=19) training and were consequently included in the analyses. All patient-reported experience measures showed a consistent but non-significant change in the direction of improved decision-making after training. According to surgeons, decisions were significantly more often made together with the patient after training (before, 38.9% vs after, 73.7%, p=0.04). Sub-analyses per diagnosis showed that patient experiences among older PC patients consistent and clinically relevant changed in the direction of improved decision-making after training (SDM-Q-9 +13.4 [95% CI −7.9; 34.6], VAS-I +0.27 [95% CI −1.1; 1.6], VAS-S +0.88 [95% CI −0.5; 2.2], DRS −10.3 [95% CI −27.8; 7.1]).ConclusionThis pilot study strengthens the practical potential of the intervention’s concept among older surgical cancer patients.

Developing Verbal Health Literacy with Adult Learners Through Training in Shared Decision-Making.

Background:Health literacy skills are often assessed in relation to written health materials; however, many important communications are in other formats, especially verbal communication with health care providers.Objective:This qualitative study sought to examine adult learners' experiences of developing verbal health literacy skills within an Australian adult basic education program, and to explore verbal communication and shared decision-making as a constituent domain of health literacy.Methods:We conducted a semi-structured qualitative interview study between September and November 2014 with adult learners who had participated in a single-semester health literacy program that included an integrated shared decision-making component. We analyzed interviews using the Framework method; a matrix-based approach to thematic analysis. A hybrid process of inductive and deductive coding was used to interpret raw data.Key Results:Interviewees were 22 students from six health literacy classes and ranged in age from 18 to 74 years (mean, 48.3). The majority were women (n = 15) and born outside Australia (n = 13). Health literacy was generally limited according to the Newest Vital Sign screening tool (n = 17). The health literacy program appeared to serve two key functions. First, it stimulated awareness that patients have the right to participate in decision-making concerning their treatment and care. Second, it facilitated verbal skill development across the domains of functional (e.g., communicating symptoms), communicative (e.g., asking questions to extract information about treatment options), and critical (e.g., integrating new knowledge with preferences) health literacy.Conclusions:Our findings support the conceptualization of health literacy as a modifiable health asset that is subject to change and improvement as a result of deliberate intervention. Results reinforce verbal health literacy as an important component of health literacy, and draw attention to the hierarchy of verbal skills needed for consumers to become more actively involved in decisions about their health. We present a revised model of health literacy based on our findings. [Health Literacy Research and Practice. 2017;1(4):e257–e268.]Plain Language Summary:We developed a health literacy program for adults with lower literacy to help learners develop skills to talk to health care providers and share health decisions. The program was taught in Australian adult education settings. The article explores the range of health literacy skills needed for communication and decision-making in this study, and presents a model in which verbal skills are an important part of health literacy.

Efficacy of the doktormitSDM training module in supporting shared decision making − Results from a multicenter double-blind randomized controlled trial

ObjectiveTraining to improve physicians’ shared decision making (SDM) competencies with proven effectiveness and efficiency is rare. This study evaluated the brief in situ training module ‘doktormitSDM’. MethodsIn a multicenter RCT, each physician recorded four consultations, each of which included a diagnostic or treatment decision (N=152 consultations from seven medical specialties).The doktormitSDM training module included two video-based individual coaching sessions (15min) at the physicians’ workplaces, supplemented by a manual and a video tutorial.Primary endpoint was the compound measure SDMmass (based on the MAPPIN’SDM system) which incorporates patient and observer perceptions of involvement and doctor-patient concordance on perceived involvement. ResultsSDMmass increased significantly in the intervention group compared to the controls (effect size 0.58; p=0.05; t-test). This effect tended to persist at follow-up (effect size 0.63; p=0.06). Patients’ perceived involvement increased accordingly (effect sizes 0.9/.58; p=0.01/.07). ConclusionThe doktormitSDM training module is effective and efficient at improving SDM competencies. This is the first SDM training to be evaluated with a compound measure simultaneously considering doctor, patient and observer ratings. Practice implicationsOwing to its very brief form and its reference to the doctors’ own consultation videos, the doktormitSDM training module meets clinicians’ needs and time constraints.