Shared Decision-Making in Dermatology A Scoping Review

被引:19
|
作者
Morrison, Tessalyn [1 ]
Johnson, Jacob [1 ]
Baghoomian, Wenelia [1 ]
Hamilton, Andrew [1 ]
Simpson, Eric [1 ]
Greiling, Teri [1 ]
Foster, Erin [1 ]
机构
[1] Oregon Hlth & Sci Univ, Ctr Hlth & Healing, 3303 SW Bond Ave,16th Floor, Portland, OR 97239 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.5362
中图分类号
R75 [皮肤病学与性病学];
学科分类号
100206 ;
摘要
IMPORTANCE Shared decision-making (SDM) can improve the quality of care for patients. The extent to which this tool has been used and the evidence supporting its use in dermatology have not been systematically examined. OBJECTIVE To perform a scoping review of the literature regarding SDM in dermatology. EVIDENCE REVIEW Searches of Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Sciverse Scopus, and EBM Reviews were conduced on July 11, 2019, and March 6, 2020. There were no limits on date, type of article, language, or subject for the initial search. A total of 1673 titles and abstracts were screened by 2 independent reviewers in the Covidence mixed-methods platform. Forty-one full-text studies were assessed for eligibility. For inclusion, articles needed to include a dermatologic diagnosis as well as discussion of SDM or patient decision aids. Two independent reviewers screened 29 full-text articles for inclusion and extracted qualitative data using a set of 26 predefined codes. Qualitative coding was applied to excerpts to categorize the article, define and describe advantages and disadvantages of SDM, understand patient and physician requests for SDM, and discuss methods of implementation. FINDINGS Despite a small number of articles on SDM (n = 29) in dermatology, the selected literature provided consistent messages regarding the importance of SDM for dermatology and a number of strategies and tools for implementation. Medical dermatology was the most common subspecialty studied, with melanoma, psoriasis, and connective tissue diseases most examined. Only 5 publications introduced SDM tools specifically for dermatologic conditions; of these, only 2 tools were validated. Barriers to implementation that were cited included time and a lack of training for clinicians, although the literature also provided potential solutions to these issues. All articles emphasized the value of SDM for both patients and physicians. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The literature regarding SDM in dermatology consistently suggests that it is a useful tool for providing patient-centered care. Established tools have been proposed since 2012. More research is needed to implement better practices, especially in dermatologic subspecialties. However, there are substantial suggestions from the literature for strategies and tools with which to begin a shared decision-making practice.
引用
收藏
页码:330 / 337
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Bringing personal perspective elicitation to the heart of shared decision-making: A scoping review br
    Rake, Ester A.
    Box, Ivana C. H.
    Dreesens, Dunja
    Meinders, Marjan J.
    Kremer, Jan A. M.
    Aarts, Johanna W. M.
    Elwyn, Glyn
    [J]. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2022, 105 (09) : 2860 - 2870
  • [32] Implementing shared decision-making interventions in breast cancer clinical practice: a scoping review
    Natalia Oprea
    Vittoria Ardito
    Oriana Ciani
    [J]. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 23
  • [33] Shared decision-making with people with intellectual disabilities in the last phase of life: A scoping review
    Noorlandt, H. W.
    Echteld, M. A.
    Tuffrey-Wijne, I.
    Festen, D. A. M.
    Vrijmoeth, C.
    van der Heide, A.
    Korfage, I. J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY RESEARCH, 2020, 64 (11) : 881 - 894
  • [34] KIDNEY FAILURE TREATMENT OPTIONS AND SHARED DECISION-MAKING BY ETHNIC CHINESE: A SCOPING REVIEW
    Li, Alice
    Richardson, Michelle
    Covaleski, Audrey
    Heinrich, Christina
    Meyer, Klemens
    Vesel, Tamara
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF KIDNEY DISEASES, 2023, 81 (04) : S72 - S72
  • [35] Shared decision making in surgery: A scoping review of the literature
    Niburski, Kacper
    Guadagno, Elena
    Mohtashami, Sadaf
    Poenaru, Dan
    [J]. HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2020, 23 (05) : 1241 - 1249
  • [36] Shared decision making for persons with aphasia: a scoping review
    Charamis, Konstantina
    Parsons, Caitlin
    Leonard, Carol
    Domecq, Marie-Cecile
    Smith, Ferne Mardlin
    Mayhew, Kelli J.
    Boland, Laura
    [J]. APHASIOLOGY, 2023, 37 (05) : 802 - 812
  • [37] Shared decision making with black patients: A scoping review
    Mhaimeed, Nada
    Mhaimeed, Narjis
    Mhaimeed, Omar
    Alanni, Jamal
    Burney, Zain
    Elshafeey, Abdallah
    Laws, Sa'ad
    Choi, Justin J.
    [J]. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2023, 110
  • [38] Shared Decision-Making Is Not Patient Decision-Making
    Birnbrich, Alysa
    McCulloch, Patrick C.
    Kraeutler, Matthew J.
    [J]. SPORTS HEALTH-A MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH, 2023, 15 (04): : 615 - 616
  • [39] Shared Decision-Making Measures: A Systematic Review
    Ahmad, Muayyad
    Abu Tabar, Nazih
    Othman, Elham H.
    Abdelrahim, Zakaria
    [J]. QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2020, 29 (02) : 54 - 66
  • [40] Systematic review of shared decision-making in surgery
    de Mik, S. M. L.
    Stubenrouch, F. E.
    Balm, R.
    Ubbink, D. T.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2018, 105 (13) : 1721 - 1730