Patient engagement, treatment preferences and shared decision-making in the treatment of opioid use disorder in adults: a scoping review protocol

Marshall, Tyler; Kinnard, Elizabeth N.; Hancock, Myles; King‐Jones, Susanne; Olson, Kärin; Abba‐Aji, Adam; Rittenbach, Katherine; Vohra, Sunita

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022267

Cited by 13 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The search strategy used free-text and medical subject headings derived from a relevant scoping review. 26 Supplementary File 1 available at https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2021.1028 displays the preliminary Medline search strategy.…”

Section: Search Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of shared decision-making on the treatment of anxiety and depressive disorders: systematic review

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Shared decision-making encourages patients to explore treatment options/choices in collaboration with their healthcare provider, inclusive of the best available evidence and the patient's values/preferences. Several effective treatments exist for people with anxiety and/or depressive disorders; shared decision-making may be particularly useful in this context. Aims To investigate whether shared decision-making enhances clinical outcomes in adults with anxiety and/or depressive disorders. Method A systematic review was conducted. Five electronic health databases were searched from database inception until August 2019, in addition to reference lists of included studies. Prospective controlled studies of shared decision-making in adults (aged 18–64 years) diagnosed with an anxiety and/or depressive disorder were included. Two reviewers independently conducted each stage of the review process. Results Six randomised controlled trials (N = 1834 participants) were included. Patient satisfaction improved in four studies. Patients were more likely to receive adequate treatment for depression in three studies. Anxiety symptoms decreased in one study. Patient involvement in decision-making increased in three studies. Because of the lack of blinded interventions and outcome assessment, the included studies were at moderate risk of bias. The certainty of evidence ranged from low to moderate, per GRADE criteria. Conclusions Shared decision-making shows promise for enhancing quality-of-care outcomes such as patient satisfaction, without increasing consultation time. but appears unlikely to improve symptoms of depression. However, it appears to be understudied in patients with anxiety disorders. Heterogeneity regarding definition and measurement of shared decision-making posed challenges for interpreting the results. More research is recommended to advance the field.

show abstract

Section: Search Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of shared decision-making on the treatment of anxiety and depressive disorders: systematic review

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, references of included studies were hand-searched. To optimize the search sensitivity and in line with previous studies that examine health-related preferences (Marshall et al., 2018 ) and systematic search strategies for the construct preferences (Selva et al., 2017 ; van Hoorn et al., 2016 ), a broad definition of ‘preferences’ was used to determine eligibility for inclusion: “Patient perspectives, beliefs, expectations, goals, and the processes that individuals use in considering the potential benefits, harms, costs, and inconveniences of options in relation to each other” (Montori et al., 2013 ). We aimed at data triangulation on patient preferences by including GPs views on their patients’ preferences in our search strategy.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding patients’ and significant others’ preferences on starting a diagnostic trajectory for dementia: An integrative review

Linden

Hevink

Wolfs

et al. 2022

Aging & Mental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To explore the preferences of people with memory complaints (PwMC) and their significant others regarding starting a diagnostic trajectory for dementia. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Embase. Selection of abstracts and papers was performed independently by two researchers. Methodological quality was assessed with the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Result sections of the selected papers were thematically synthesized. Results From 2497 citations, seven qualitative studies and two mixed methods studies published between 2010 and 2020 were included. Overall quality of the studies was high to moderate. A thematic synthesis showed that preferences for starting a diagnostic trajectory arose from the feeling of needing to do something about the symptoms, beliefs on the necessity and expected outcomes of starting a diagnostic trajectory. These views were influenced by normalization or validation of symptoms, the support or wishes of the social network, interactions with health care professionals, the health status of the PwMC, and societal factors such as stigma and socioeconomic status. Conclusion A variety of considerations with regard to decision-making on starting a diagnostic trajectory for dementia were identified. This emphasizes the need to explore individual preferences to facilitate a timely dementia diagnosis.

show abstract

“…The initial search strategy was developed in line with that used in a number of recent systematic reviews of SDM in general health conditions [10,24] and in mental health [16,25,26] and AOD use [19,27], as well as a systematic review of the prevalence of comorbid mental health and AOD use conditions [1]. The search strategy was then refined via consultation and iterative review with a specialist academic librarian; the strategy utilises a combination of free text terms and MEdical Subject Headings.…”

Section: Search Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Shared decision‐making among people with problematic alcohol/other drug use and co‐occurring mental health conditions: A systematic review

Fisher

Mills

Teesson

et al. 2020

Drug and Alcohol Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction and Aims Over half of people presenting to alcohol/other drug (AOD) treatment services also have a mental health condition. Guidelines support numerous viable treatment options, meaning that treatment decisions need to be evidence based and patients' preferences need to be considered. Shared decision‐making (SDM) facilitates evidence‐ and preference‐based decisions and is well researched in other health‐care areas. Little is known, however, about people's attitudes towards and experience of SDM in co‐occurring AOD and mental health conditions. Design and Methods Systematic literature review via key database searches MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews (January 2000–July 2019). Two independent reviewers assessed study eligibility, extracted data and rated study quality using a validated tool. Results Of 2393 articles identified, 10 studies were retained for final inclusion. The reviewed studies suggested that SDM is a well‐accepted and preferred approach to treatment decision‐making. SDM‐based interventions are viewed as feasible, acceptable and useful; are associated with improvements in the quality of the decision‐making process and the decision made; and have accrued less consistent evidence to support improvements in patient‐related outcomes (e.g. symptoms, treatment adherence/engagement). Discussion and Conclusions This is the first rigorous synthesis of the empirical literature on SDM in co‐occurring AOD and mental health conditions. SDM remains a nascent area of research in comorbidity treatment. Preliminary evidence supports SDM's acceptability, feasibility and utility in managing mental health and AOD comorbidities. Further research is needed to build the evidence base, especially with regard to the efficacy of SDM at improving patient‐related outcomes.

show abstract

Patient engagement, treatment preferences and shared decision-making in the treatment of opioid use disorder in adults: a scoping review protocol

Cited by 13 publications

References 43 publications

The impact of shared decision-making on the treatment of anxiety and depressive disorders: systematic review

The impact of shared decision-making on the treatment of anxiety and depressive disorders: systematic review

Understanding patients’ and significant others’ preferences on starting a diagnostic trajectory for dementia: An integrative review

Shared decision‐making among people with problematic alcohol/other drug use and co‐occurring mental health conditions: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About