Protocol for a systematic review of randomized trials of knee arthroplasty decision aids and shared decision-making approaches

Abstract

Background Shared decision-making is an approach to making treatment-based decisions that rely on the patient encounter and clear discussions between the patient and the healthcare provider. Patients with arthritis of the knee frequently seek care, and depending on arthritis severity and impact on daily life, joint arthroplasty may be considered as a treatment option. We will conduct a systematic review of shared decision-making trials in knee arthroplasty to determine the types of shared decision-making approaches used and their impact on care received. Methods Our systematic review will describe and critically appraise shared decision approaches used in randomized trials of patients undergoing knee arthroplasty, the types of outcomes reported, and the impact of these approaches on the patients’ care. We will use the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library, from inception through December 2018. Additionally, we will assess ongoing research by querying experts and searching trial registries. Discussion This study will characterize shared decision-making (SDM) approaches in knee arthroplasty randomized clinical trials and will summarize their effects of SDM on clinical and patient-reported outcomes. We anticipate this review will bring to light knowledge gaps and inform further research into the design and use of shared decision-making approaches in lower extremity arthroplasty. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019123586 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-019-1053-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Shared Decision‐Making Applied to Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials

“…Protocol and registration. The protocol was previously published (10) and registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO registration number CRD42019123586).This report adheres to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standards (11).…”

“…Eligibility criteria. Eligible studies were any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling patients considering KA for management of any type of knee arthritis (including osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, or posttraumatic arthritis) and who were randomized to receive either an intervention to promote SDM versus usual care or another active control (10).…”

“…To our knowledge, the impact of interventions to promote SDM in the care of patients with knee arthritis considering KA has not been systematically summarized. Therefore, we set out to conduct a systematic review of the extant literature on the features and impact of SDM interventions tested in randomized trials, as described in our published protocol (10).…”

Using hybrid consistent fuzzy preference relations–importance‐performance analysis model to improve shared decision‐making quality based on orthopaedic nurses' perceptions

“…To provide the most appropriate care, medical staff must understand patients' conditions and how they value medical decisions (Singh Ospina et al, 2020). Therefore, the SDM has become a gold standard method in medical decision‐making (Shen et al, 2020) and has been discussed in different medical fields, such as paediatrics (Wyatt et al, 2015), surgery (Pham et al, 2020), cancer (Riikonen et al, 2019), orthopaedics (Riddle et al, 2019), urology (Grüne et al, 2021) and telemedicine (Hartasanchez et al, 2021).…”