Seven-day shared decision making for outpatients with first episode of mood disorders among university students: A randomized controlled trial

Aoki, Yumi; Takaesu, Yoshikazu; Inoue, Masato; Furuno, Takehiko; Kobayashi, Yasushi; Chiba, Hiromi; Kakita, Yasuhide; Hori, Masataka; Tachimori, Hisateru; Watanabe, Koichiro

doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2019.112531

Cited by 22 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During the deliberation, the users can prepare for further encounters on the decision‐making process (Aoki et al, 2019ab; Bonfils et al, 2018; Goscha & Rapp, 2015; Grim, Rosenberg, Svedberg, & Schön, 2016; Hamann et al, 2016; Metz et al, 2018; Schön et al, 2018; van der Krieke et al, 2013).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interprofessional collaboration consisting of different professions (e.g., psychiatrists, nurses, psychologists, pharmacists, social workers, occupational therapists) is perceived to facilitate SDM by addressing time constraints, allowing more opportunities for the users to discuss their concerns and opinions (Chong et al, 2013a). Nurses can serve as a bridge between the user and the psychiatrist, translating technical information and helping them as a decision coach, to further clarify the user's preferences and values (Aoki et al, 2019b; Paudel et al, 2018; Raue et al, 2019). Furthermore, engaging the involvement of loved ones as other potential carers , such as family members, and providing them information about mental illness and treatments are identified as facilitators to the SDM process (Chong et al, 2013b).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thereby, SDM led the users with SMI to less conflict (Metz et al, 2019; Perestelo‐Perez et al, 2017), more satisfaction (LeBlanc et al, 2015; Woltmann et al, 2011), and being more responsible for their decisions and actions (Hamann et al, 2011). SDM did not extend time required for decision‐making consultation/encounters (Aoki et al, 2019b; Bonfils et al, 2018; LeBlanc et al, 2015).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It can also decrease the costs associated with the use of unnecessary or unwanted prescriptions (Latimer, Bond, & Drake, 2011). Several studies have found that most adults with SMI wanted to be involved in decision making (Park et al, 2014;Velligan, Roberts, Sierra, Fredrick, & Roach, 2016), and are able to participate (Aoki, Furuno, Watanabe, & Kayama, 2019a;Aoki et al, 2019b;Duncan et al, 2010;LeBlanc et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness: A concept analysis

Aoki

2020

Japan Journal Nursing Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: Shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness has increasingly attracted attention. However, this concept has not been comprehensively clarified. This review aimed to clarify a concept of shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness such as schizophrenia, depression, and bipolar disorder, and propose an adequate definition. Methods: Rodgers' evolutionary concept analysis was used. MEDLINE, Psy-chINFO, and CINAHL were searched for articles written in English and published between 2010 and November 2019. The search terms were "psychiatr*" or "mental" or "schizophren*" or "depression" or "bipolar disorder", combined with "shared decision making". In total, 70 articles met the inclusion criteria. An inductive approach was used to identify themes and sub-themes related to shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness. Surrogate terms and a definition of the concept were also described. Results: Four key attributes were identified: user-professional relationship, communication process, user-friendly visualization, and broader stakeholder approach. Communication process was the densest attribute, which consisted of five phases: goal sharing, information sharing, deliberation, mutual agreement, and follow-up. The antecedents as prominent predisposing factors were long-term complex illness, power imbalance, global trend, users' desire, concerns, and stigma. The consequences included decision-related outcomes, users' changes, professionals' changes, and enhanced relationship. Conclusions: Shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness is a communication process, involving both user-friendly visualization techniques and broader stakeholders. The process may overcome traditional power imbalance and encourage changes among both users and professionals that could enhance the dyadic relationship.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness: A concept analysis

Aoki

2020

Japan Journal Nursing Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…24 Proposed changes to IPDAS criteria. Although 21 RCTs evaluated decision coaching, there is inadequate evidence 37 IPDAS ü ü Berger-Ho¨ger et al 29,41 Interprofessional shared decision making model ü Evidence-based patient information criteria 5 ü Brown et al 30 Ottawa Decision Support Framework/IPDAS ü ü Bozic et al 32 Situation, Choices, Objectives, People, Evaluation, and Decisions (SCOPED) checklist ü x…”

Section: Updated Definition Based On the Included Rcts Framework/tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidance and/or Decision Coaching with Patient Decision Aids: Scoping Reviews to Inform the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction In 2005, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) collaboration identified guidance and decision coaching as important dimensions of patient decision aids (PtDAs) and developed a set of quality criteria. We sought to update definitions, theoretical rationale, and evidence for guidance and/or decision coaching used within or alongside PtDAs for the IPDAS update 2.0. Methods We conducted 2 scoping reviews on guidance and decision coaching, including systematic searches and a hand search of the Cochrane Review on PtDAs. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on guidance or decision coaching used with/alongside PtDAs. Data, including conceptual models, were summarized narratively and with meta-analyses when appropriate. Results Of 1022 citations, we found no RCTs that evaluated guidance in PtDAs. The 2013 definition for guidance was endorsed, and we made minimal changes to the description of guidance. Of 3039 citations, we identified 21 RCTs on decision coaching informed by 5 conceptual models stating that people exposed to decision coaching are more likely to progress in making informed decisions consistent with their values. Compared to usual care, decision coaching with PtDAs led to improved knowledge mean difference [MD], 19.5/100; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.0–29.0; 5 RCTs). Compared to decision coaching alone, PtDAs led to a small improvement in knowledge (MD, 3.6/100; 95% CI, 1.0–6.3; 3 RCTs). There were variable effects on other outcomes. We simplified the decision coaching definition slightly and defined minimal decision coaching elements. Conclusion We found no evidence on which to propose changes in guidance in IPDAS. Decision coaching is continuing to be used alongside PtDAs, but there is inadequate evidence on the added effectiveness compared to PtDAs alone. The decision coaching definition was updated with minimal elements.

show abstract

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

Stacey,

Lewis,

Smith

et al. 2024

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seven-day shared decision making for outpatients with first episode of mood disorders among university students: A randomized controlled trial

Cited by 22 publications

References 23 publications

Shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness: A concept analysis

Shared decision making for adults with severe mental illness: A concept analysis

Guidance and/or Decision Coaching with Patient Decision Aids: Scoping Reviews to Inform the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS)

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About