Using Nudges to Enhance Clinicians' Implementation of Shared Decision Making With Patient Decision Aids

被引:11
|
作者
Kostick, Kristin M. [1 ]
Trejo, Meredith [1 ]
Volk, Robert J. [2 ]
Estep, Jerry D. [3 ]
Blumenthal-Barby, J. S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Baylor Coll Med, Ctr Med Eth & Hlth Policy, One Baylor Plaza MC 420, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[2] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Hlth Serv Res, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[3] Cleveland Clin, Dept Cardiovasc Med, Cleveland, OH USA
关键词
decision aids; shared decision making; behavioral economics; implementation; SOCIAL NORMS; CARE; INTERVENTIONS; AUTOMATICITY; METAANALYSIS; INCENTIVES; DEFAULTS;
D O I
10.1177/2381468320915906
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background. Although effective interventions for shared decision making (SDM) exist, there is a lack of uptake of these tools into clinical practice. ``Nudges,'' which draw on behavioral economics and target automatic thinking processes, are used by policy makers to influence population-level behavior change. Nudges have not been applied in the context of SDM interventions but have potential to influence clinician motivation, a primary barrier to long-term adoption of SDM tools. Objective. Describe, evaluate, and propose recommendations for the use of a behavioral economics framework (MINDSPACE) on clinician motivation and behavior during implementation of a validated decision aid (DA) for left ventricular assist device at nine hospitals. Methods. Qualitative thematic analysis of process notes from stakeholder meetings during the first 6 months of implementation to identify examples of how the MINDSPACE framework was operationalized. Quantitative implementation progress was evaluated using the REAIM framework. Results. MINDSPACE components were translated into concrete approaches that leveraged influential stakeholders, fostered ownership over the DA and positive emotional associations, spread desirable norms across sites, and situated the DA within established default processes. DA reach to eligible patients increased from 9.8% in the first month of implementation to 70.0% in the sixth month. Larger gains in reach were observed following meetings using MINDSPACE approaches. Limitations. The MINDSPACE framework does not capture all possible influences on behavior and responses to nudges may differ across populations. Conclusions. Behavioral economics can be applied to implementation science to foster uptake of SDM tools by increasing clinician motivation. Our recommendations can help other researchers effectively apply these approaches in real-world settings when there are often limited incentives and opportunities to change organizational- or structural-level factors.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Professional centred shared decision making:: Patient decision aids in practice in primary care
    Watson, Duika Burges
    Thomson, Richard G.
    Murtagh, Madeleine J.
    BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2008, 8 (1)
  • [22] Use Certified Patient Decision Aids to Facilitate Shared Decision Making at the Margins of Viability
    Pope, Thaddeus Mason
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2022, 22 (11): : 49 - 51
  • [23] Professional centred shared decision making: Patient decision aids in practicein primary care
    Duika Burges Watson
    Richard G Thomson
    Madeleine J Murtagh
    BMC Health Services Research, 8
  • [24] Clinicians' and patients' perceptions of the use of artificial intelligence decision aids to inform shared decision making: a systematic review
    Hassan, Nehal
    Slight, Robert D.
    Bimpong, Kweku
    Weiand, Daniel
    Vellinga, Akke
    Morgan, Graham
    Slight, Sarah P.
    LANCET, 2021, 398 : 80 - 80
  • [25] Implementation of shared decision-making for aortic stenosis: Development of a patient decision aid
    Lauck, S.
    Borregaard, B.
    Lewis, K.
    De Souza, I
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR NURSING, 2021, 20 : 29 - 29
  • [26] Shared Decision-Making Is Not Patient Decision-Making
    Birnbrich, Alysa
    McCulloch, Patrick C.
    Kraeutler, Matthew J.
    SPORTS HEALTH-A MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH, 2023, 15 (04): : 615 - 616
  • [27] Risk Calculators and Decision Aids Are Not Enough for Shared Decision Making
    Kopecky, Kimberly E.
    Urbach, David
    Schwarze, Margaret L.
    JAMA SURGERY, 2019, 154 (01) : 3 - 4
  • [28] SHARED DECISION MAKING AND USE OF DECISION AIDS IN MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS
    Dhumal, T.
    Schmitt, A. R.
    Desai, G., V
    Kamal, K. M.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2019, 22 : S285 - S285
  • [29] Current situation of shared decision making in osteoporosis: A comprehensive literature review of patient decision aids and decision drivers
    Nogues, Xavier
    Carbonell, Maria Cristina
    Canals, Laura
    Lizan, Luis
    Palacios, Santiago
    HEALTH SCIENCE REPORTS, 2022, 5 (06)
  • [30] Implementing shared decision making in diverse health care systems: the role of patient decision aids
    O'Connor, AM
    Graham, ID
    PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2005, 57 (03) : 247 - 249