Shared-decision making in pancreatic cancer: A scoping review

IF 2.9 2区医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

Patient Education and Counseling Pub Date : 2025-05-13 DOI:10.1016/j.pec.2025.108828

Patrick L. Quinn , Shah Saiyed , Aslam Ejaz

{"title":"Shared-decision making in pancreatic cancer: A scoping review","authors":"Patrick L. Quinn , Shah Saiyed , Aslam Ejaz","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2025.108828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This review aimed to map the current landscape of literature on informed and shared decision-making (SDM) among patients with pancreatic cancer (PC).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and PsycINFO were queried for studies published before January 2024 that measured SDM or evaluated interventions targeted at SDM among patients with PC. Studies were excluded if they focused on clinician decision-making or the quality of education materials. The included studies were evaluated for interventions, assessment type, and key findings.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Our initial search identified 1194 studies, with 16 studies meeting our inclusion criteria: 4 cross-sectional, 1 mixed method, 8 qualitative, and 3 experimental. Common themes identified across studies included that there was a subset of patients that did not feel involved in their care, patients felt overwhelmed with information during the initial consultation, patients understood that there were limited treatment options, and patients did not always understand treatment decisions. The experimental studies each evaluated a different intervention (i.e., decision aid, clinician training, or combination) with mixed results.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>There is limited data regarding SDM in PC, however, common themes found that PC patients commonly did not feel involved in their care. Future research should focus on role congruence in decision-making, patient empowerment, improving the delivery and comprehension of treatment information, and interventions to improve the SDM process.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"137 ","pages":"Article 108828"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient Education and Counseling","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738399125001958","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This review aimed to map the current landscape of literature on informed and shared decision-making (SDM) among patients with pancreatic cancer (PC).

Methods

PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and PsycINFO were queried for studies published before January 2024 that measured SDM or evaluated interventions targeted at SDM among patients with PC. Studies were excluded if they focused on clinician decision-making or the quality of education materials. The included studies were evaluated for interventions, assessment type, and key findings.

Results

Our initial search identified 1194 studies, with 16 studies meeting our inclusion criteria: 4 cross-sectional, 1 mixed method, 8 qualitative, and 3 experimental. Common themes identified across studies included that there was a subset of patients that did not feel involved in their care, patients felt overwhelmed with information during the initial consultation, patients understood that there were limited treatment options, and patients did not always understand treatment decisions. The experimental studies each evaluated a different intervention (i.e., decision aid, clinician training, or combination) with mixed results.

Conclusions

There is limited data regarding SDM in PC, however, common themes found that PC patients commonly did not feel involved in their care. Future research should focus on role congruence in decision-making, patient empowerment, improving the delivery and comprehension of treatment information, and interventions to improve the SDM process.

查看原文本刊更多论文

胰腺癌的共同决策：范围综述

目的本综述旨在绘制胰腺癌（PC）患者知情和共同决策（SDM）的文献现状。方法查询spubmed、Scopus、Embase和PsycINFO在2024年1月之前发表的测量PC患者SDM或评估针对SDM干预措施的研究。如果研究的重点是临床医生的决策或教育材料的质量，则将其排除在外。对纳入的研究进行干预、评估类型和主要发现的评估。我们的初步检索确定了1194项研究，其中16项研究符合我们的纳入标准：4项横断面研究，1项混合方法研究，8项定性研究，3项实验研究。在所有研究中发现的共同主题包括，有一部分患者感觉自己没有参与到他们的护理中，患者在最初的咨询中感到信息不堪重负，患者知道治疗选择有限，患者并不总是理解治疗决定。每个实验研究都评估了不同的干预措施（即，决策辅助，临床医生培训或组合），结果好坏参半。结论：关于PC中SDM的数据有限，然而，共同的主题发现PC患者通常不觉得自己参与了他们的护理。未来的研究应侧重于决策中的角色一致性，患者赋权，改善治疗信息的传递和理解，以及改善SDM过程的干预措施。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Patient Education and Counseling 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生

CiteScore

5.60

自引率

11.40%

发文量

384

审稿时长

46 days

期刊介绍： Patient Education and Counseling is an interdisciplinary, international journal for patient education and health promotion researchers, managers and clinicians. The journal seeks to explore and elucidate the educational, counseling and communication models in health care. Its aim is to provide a forum for fundamental as well as applied research, and to promote the study of organizational issues involved with the delivery of patient education, counseling, health promotion services and training models in improving communication between providers and patients.