Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making: a systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument.
Couët, Nicolas; Desroches, Sophie; Robitaille, Hubert; Vaillancourt, Hugues; Leblanc, Annie; Turcotte, Stéphane; Elwyn, Glyn; Légaré, France.
Afiliação
  • Couët N; Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Université Laval, Québec City, QC, Canada.
  • Desroches S; Department of Food and Nutrition Sciences, Université Laval, Québec City, QC, Canada.
  • Robitaille H; Institute of Nutraceuticals and Functional Foods (INAF), Québec City, QC, Canada.
  • Vaillancourt H; Research Center of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, Hôpital St-François-D'Assise, Québec City, QC, Canada.
  • Leblanc A; Institute of Nutraceuticals and Functional Foods (INAF), Québec City, QC, Canada.
  • Turcotte S; Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
  • Elwyn G; Research Center of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec, Hôpital St-François-D'Assise, Québec City, QC, Canada.
  • Légaré F; The Dartmouth Center for Health Care Delivery Science, Hanover, NH, USA.
Health Expect ; 18(4): 542-61, 2015 Aug.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23451939
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

We have no clear overview of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in the decision-making process during consultations. The Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making instrument (OPTION) was designed to assess this.

OBJECTIVE:

To systematically review studies that used the OPTION instrument to observe the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making across a range of clinical contexts, including different health professions and lengths of consultation. SEARCH STRATEGY We conducted online literature searches in multiple databases (2001-12) and gathered further data through networking. INCLUSION CRITERIA (i) OPTION scores as reported outcomes and (ii) health-care providers and patients as study participants. For analysis, we only included studies using the revised scale. DATA EXTRACTION Extracted data included (i) study and participant characteristics and (ii) OPTION outcomes (scores, statistical associations and reported psychometric results). We also assessed the quality of OPTION outcomes reporting. MAIN

RESULTS:

We found 33 eligible studies, 29 of which used the revised scale. Overall, we found low levels of patient-involving behaviours in cases where no intervention was used to implement shared decision making (SDM), the mean OPTION score was 23 ± 14 (0-100 scale). When assessed, the variables most consistently associated with higher OPTION scores were interventions to implement SDM (n = 8/9) and duration of consultations (n = 8/15).

CONCLUSIONS:

Whatever the clinical context, few health-care providers consistently attempt to facilitate patient involvement, and even fewer adjust care to patient preferences. However, both SDM interventions and longer consultations could improve this.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Participação do Paciente / Tomada de Decisões / Preferência do Paciente Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Participação do Paciente / Tomada de Decisões / Preferência do Paciente Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article