Exploring Motivations and Resistances for Implementing Shared Decision-making in Clinical Practice: A Systematic Review Based on a Structure-process-outcome Model

Overview

Journal Health Expect

Publisher Wiley

Specialty Public Health

Date 2022 Jun 6

PMID 35662361

Authors

Changhai Tang

Anqi Wang

Jingjing Yan

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: Shared decision-making (SDM) as a multicollaborative approach is vital for facilitating patient-centred care. Considering the limited clinical practice, we attempted to synthesize the motivations and resistances, and investigate their mutual relationships for advancing the implementation of SDM.

Methods: A comprehensive systematic review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines was performed. 'Shared decision making' was searched as the mesh term through PubMed, Web of Science and EBSCO from 2000 to 2021, and the quality of literature was appraised using the QualSyst Tool. Motivations and resistances were categorized based on content analysis and the 'structure-process-outcome' model.

Results: From 8319 potential citations, 105 were included, comprising 53 qualitative studies (the average quality score is 0.92) and 52 quantitative studies (the average quality score is 0.95). A total of 42 categories of factors were identified into 11 themes and further grouped into three dimensions: structure, process and outcome. The structure dimension comprised six themes (71.43%), the process dimension contained four themes (11.01%) and the outcome dimension covered only one theme. Across all categories, decision-making time and patients' decision preparedness in the process dimension were the most reported, followed by physicians' communication skills and health care environment in the structure dimension. Analysis of implementation of SDM among various types of diseases showed that more influencing factors were extracted from chronic diseases and unspecified disease decisions.

Conclusions: The major determinants for the implementation of SDM are focused on the structural dimension, which challenges the health systems of both developed and low- and middle-income countries. Furthermore, we consider it important to understand more about the interactions among the factors to take integrated measures to address the problems and to ensure the effectiveness of implementing SDM.

Patient Or Public Contribution: Patients, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders articulated their perspectives on the implementation of SDM actively, and these were adopted and analysed in this study. However, the above-mentioned individuals were not directly involved in the process of this study. Protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021259309).

Citing Articles

People living with chronic pain in Canada face difficult decisions and decisional conflict concerning their care: data from the national DECIDE-PAIN survey.

Naye F, Legare F, Cachinho C, Gerard T, Toupin-April K, Sasseville M BMC Prim Care. 2024; 25(1):424.

PMID: 39702110 PMC: 11657379. DOI: 10.1186/s12875-024-02667-z.

Factors Guiding Clinical Decision-Making in Genitourinary Oncology.

Wosny M, Aeppli S, Fischer S, Peres T, Rothermundt C, Hastings J Cancer Med. 2024; 13(20):e70304.

PMID: 39435678 PMC: 11494402. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.70304.

Ethics of Nudging in the COVID-19 Crisis and the Necessary Return to the Principles of Shared Decision Making: A Critical Review.

Junger N, Hirsch O Cureus. 2024; 16(4):e57960.

PMID: 38601812 PMC: 11005480. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.57960.

Innovative Approaches to Safe Surgery: A Narrative Synthesis of Best Practices.

Hussain A, Kakakhel M, Ashraf M, Shahab M, Ahmad F, Luqman F Cureus. 2024; 15(11):e49723.

PMID: 38161861 PMC: 10757557. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.49723.

Brownfield redevelopment evaluation based on structure-process-outcome theory and continuous ordered weighted averaging operator-topology method.

Jian H, Hao H, Haidan J, Haize P, Chuan L Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):17530.

PMID: 37845278 PMC: 10579277. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-44793-1.

References

Hamann J, Kohl S, McCabe R, Buhner M, Mendel R, Albus M . What can patients do to facilitate shared decision making? A qualitative study of patients with depression or schizophrenia and psychiatrists. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2015; 51(4):617-25. DOI: 10.1007/s00127-015-1089-z. View

Pel-Littel R, Snaterse M, Teppich N, Buurman B, van Etten-Jamaludin F, van Weert J . Barriers and facilitators for shared decision making in older patients with multiple chronic conditions: a systematic review. BMC Geriatr. 2021; 21(1):112. PMC: 7866443. DOI: 10.1186/s12877-021-02050-y. View

van Til J, Drossaert C, Punter R, IJzerman M . The potential for shared decision-making and decision aids in rehabilitation medicine. J Rehabil Med. 2010; 42(6):598-604. DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0549. View

Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M . Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015; 350:g7647. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g7647. View

Padilla Garrido N, Aguado Correa F, Bayo Lozano E, Bayo Calero J, Ortega Moreno M . [Physicians' awareness and assessment of shared decision making in oncology practice.]. Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2019; 93. PMC: 11583175. View

Desroches S, Lapointe A, Deschenes S, Gagnon M, Legare F . Exploring dietitians' salient beliefs about shared decision-making behaviors. Implement Sci. 2011; 6:57. PMC: 3120721. DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-57. View

Ashoorian D, Davidson R . Shared decision making for psychiatric medication management: a summary of its uptake, barriers and facilitators. Int J Clin Pharm. 2021; 43(3):759-763. DOI: 10.1007/s11096-021-01240-3. View

Zeuner R, Frosch D, Kuzemchak M, Politi M . Physicians' perceptions of shared decision-making behaviours: a qualitative study demonstrating the continued chasm between aspirations and clinical practice. Health Expect. 2014; 18(6):2465-76. PMC: 5810629. DOI: 10.1111/hex.12216. View

White D, Braddock 3rd C, Bereknyei S, Curtis J . Toward shared decision making at the end of life in intensive care units: opportunities for improvement. Arch Intern Med. 2007; 167(5):461-7. DOI: 10.1001/archinte.167.5.461. View

10.

Xu R, Wong E . Involvement in shared decision-making for patients in public specialist outpatient clinics in Hong Kong. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017; 11:505-512. PMC: 5352249. DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S126316. View

11.

Mathijssen E, van den Bemt B, Wielsma S, van den Hoogen F, Vriezekolk J . Exploring healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes and experiences of shared decision making in rheumatology. RMD Open. 2020; 6(1). PMC: 7046943. DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2019-001121. View

12.

Huang C, Lam L, Zhong Y, Plummer V, Cross W . Chinese mental health professionals' perceptions of shared decision-making regarding people diagnosed with schizophrenia: A qualitative study. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2020; 30(1):189-199. DOI: 10.1111/inm.12771_1. View

13.

Hoang K, Halpern-Felsher B, Brooks M, Blankenburg R . Shared Decision-making With Parents of Hospitalized Children: A Qualitative Analysis of Parents' and Providers' Perspectives. Hosp Pediatr. 2020; 10(11):977-985. DOI: 10.1542/hpeds.2020-0075. View

14.

Donabedian A . Evaluating the quality of medical care. 1966. Milbank Q. 2005; 83(4):691-729. PMC: 2690293. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00397.x. View

15.

Scholl I, Kobrin S, Elwyn G . "All about the money?" A qualitative interview study examining organizational- and system-level characteristics that promote or hinder shared decision-making in cancer care in the United States. Implement Sci. 2020; 15(1):81. PMC: 7507661. DOI: 10.1186/s13012-020-01042-7. View

16.

Hayes D, Edbrooke-Childs J, Town R, Wolpert M, Midgley N . Barriers and facilitators to shared decision making in child and youth mental health: clinician perspectives using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2018; 28(5):655-666. PMC: 6514112. DOI: 10.1007/s00787-018-1230-0. View

17.

Bomhof-Roordink H, Gartner F, Stiggelbout A, Pieterse A . Key components of shared decision making models: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2019; 9(12):e031763. PMC: 6937101. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031763. View

18.

Joseph-Williams N, Elwyn G, Edwards A . Knowledge is not power for patients: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of patient-reported barriers and facilitators to shared decision making. Patient Educ Couns. 2013; 94(3):291-309. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.10.031. View

19.

Menear M, Garvelink M, Adekpedjou R, Perez M, Robitaille H, Turcotte S . Factors associated with shared decision making among primary care physicians: Findings from a multicentre cross-sectional study. Health Expect. 2017; 21(1):212-221. PMC: 5750688. DOI: 10.1111/hex.12603. View

20.

Abrines-Jaume N, Midgley N, Hopkins K, Hoffman J, Martin K, Law D . A qualitative analysis of implementing shared decision making in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services in the United Kingdom: Stages and facilitators. Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2014; 21(1):19-31. DOI: 10.1177/1359104514547596. View