Communicating Evidence for Participatory Decision Making

Abstract

HYSICIANS SHOULD CREATE COLlaborative partnerships with patients (and families) in which clinical decisions are made using the best available evidence, consistent with patients' values, goals, and capabilities. 1 However, this ideal is rarely achieved. Physicians typically spend less than 1 minute out of a 20-minute visit discussing treatment and planning. 2 Informed decision making occurs in only 9% of outpatient office visits, and physicians ask patients if they have questions in less than half. 3,4 Although patients generally want more information about their illnesses, 5 they recall only a fraction of the information physicians transmit. 2,6 Communicating evidence to patients has practical, relational, and ethical goals. Informed patients are more likely to participate actively in their care, make wiser decisions, come to a common understanding with their physicians, and adhere more fully to treatment. Communicating evidence can transform a physician-dominated relationship into one that is relationship-centered. 7 Patients have a right to understand their illness, prognosis, and treatment options, regardless of whether they choose to participate in decisions. 8 Patients care about how evidence is presented. Elwyn et al 9 published 2 studies in which focus groups of physician-educators and residents defined skills for shared decision making, including communicating evidence. These skills were used rarely. Participants suggested that the decision options be presented before eliciting the patient's preferred role in the decision or determining the preferred formats for further discussion. The focus groups in the study by Ford et al 10 included a va

Brief Training of Student Clinicians in Shared Decision Making: A Single-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

“…It commenced with a presentation of a fivestep framework for communicating evidence for participatory decision making (see online appendix) and some strategies for each implementing each step. 20 Participants were then shown a DVD of a pre-recorded modelled role-play of a 12-min consultation between a clinician and standardised patient that demonstrated some of the skills being taught. The tutorial concluded with a facilitated critique of this role-play and group discussion about strategies that can be used to facilitate shared decision making and when various strategies may be most appropriate.…”

Preventive Pharmacologic Treatments for Episodic Migraine in Adults

“…9,18,19,[23][24][25] Systematic reviews and meta-analyses with consistent and transparent appraisal of study quality and strength of evidence are essential for arriving at evidence-based migraine preventive treatment and policy decisions. 26 Previously published systematic reviews focused on the efficacy of specific drugs rather than comparative effectiveness and tolerability of all pharmacologic options. 27,28 In addition, the Institute of Medicine recommends basing treatment decisions on post-marketing studies tracking drug benefits and harms after FDA approval.…”

Communicating new policy on antibiotic prophylaxis with patients: a randomised controlled trial

“…2 Nowadays, decision-aids for a variety of clinical processes are being developed, however, there is uncertainty regarding their efficacy in communicating information and effectiveness in helping patients make decisions. 5 Mixed results have been shown by studies investigating the effectiveness of evidence-based leaflets as a communication tool to improve information to patients.…”

“…1 They need high quality information with which they can actively participate in their care, make an informed decision, come to a common understanding with their physicians and comply more fully with treatment requirements. 2 …”