Background: Shared decision making (SDM) is a process within the physician–patient relationship applicable to any clinical action, whether diagnostic, therapeutic, or preventive in nature. It has been defined as a process of mutual respect and participation between the doctor and the patient. The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of decision aids (DA) in primary care based on changes in adherence to treatments, knowledge, and awareness of the disease, conflict with decisions, and patients’ and health professionals’ satisfaction with the intervention. Methods: A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was conducted in Medline, CINAHL, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database. The inclusion criteria were randomized clinical trials as study design; use of SDM with DA as an intervention; primary care as clinical context; written in English, Spanish, and Portuguese; and published between January 2007 and January 2019. The risk of bias of the included studies in this review was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Results: Twenty four studies were selected out of the 201 references initially identified. With the use of DA, the use of antibiotics was reduced in cases of acute respiratory infection and decisional conflict was decreased when dealing with the treatment choice for atrial fibrillation and osteoporosis. The rate of determination of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in the prostate cancer screening decreased and colorectal cancer screening increased. Both professionals and patients increased their knowledge about depression, type 2 diabetes, and the perception of risk of acute myocardial infarction at 10 years without statins and with statins. The satisfaction was greater with the use of DA in choosing the treatment for depression, in cardiovascular risk management, in the treatment of low back pain, and in the use of statin therapy in diabetes. Blinding of outcomes assessment was the most common bias. Conclusions: DA used in primary care are effective to reduce decisional conflict and improve knowledge on the disease and treatment options, awareness of risk, and satisfaction with the decisions made. More studies are needed to assess the impact of shared decision making in primary care.

Mortality rates among pluripathological patients are significantly higher in the hospital setting, with advanced age and dependence on certain vital functions the main clinical aspects. Other features involved in the care, such as the loss of autonomy and social problems, have important ethical implications. The aim of this article is to analyze the health problems and the functional and social situation of chronic patients after hospital admission in order to determine their care needs and the ethical implications these might have. For this, a cross-sectional descriptive study is being carried out with a sample of 111 chronic pluripathological patients admitted to the internal medicine service and discharged later. Overall, 96.6% of the patients in the sample were dependent, 91.7% had social problems or were at social risk and 36.9% had cognitive impairment. Among dependent patients, 59.4% had social problems (p = 0.029), 19.2% lived alone (p = 0.13), and in 73.3% of cases the housing was inadequate (p = 0.47). Among those with cognitive impairment, 79.5% of patients had social problems (p = 0.001), and 10.3% lived alone (p = 0.038). The results of the study confirm the presence of dependence and social problems at hospital discharge in a high proportion of chronic patients. Planning their care can lead to ethical conflicts related to the use of information technologies, which are destined to promote the patients’ autonomy, and to the social problems associated with the illness.