Integrating Shared Decision Making and Decision Support Tools into Clinical Practice Guidelines: What Does It Take? A Qualitative Study.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Lena Fischer, Rahel Wollny, Leon V Schewe, Fülöp Scheibler, Torsten Karge, Thomas Langer, Corinna Schaefer, Ivan D Florez, Andrew Hutchinson, Sheyu Li, Marta Maes-Carballo, Zachary Munn, Lilisbeth Perestelo-Perez, Livia Puljak, Anne Stiggelbout, Dawid Pieper
{"title":"Integrating Shared Decision Making and Decision Support Tools into Clinical Practice Guidelines: What Does It Take? A Qualitative Study.","authors":"Lena Fischer, Rahel Wollny, Leon V Schewe, Fülöp Scheibler, Torsten Karge, Thomas Langer, Corinna Schaefer, Ivan D Florez, Andrew Hutchinson, Sheyu Li, Marta Maes-Carballo, Zachary Munn, Lilisbeth Perestelo-Perez, Livia Puljak, Anne Stiggelbout, Dawid Pieper","doi":"10.1177/0272989X251368866","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background.</b> Awareness of shared decision making (SDM) is growing, but its integration into clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) remains challenging. We sought expert insights to identify strategies for more successfully integrating SDM and decision support tools into CPGs. Specifically, our objectives were to determine 1) how to identify CPG recommendations where SDM is most relevant and 2) what factors in CPG development hinder or facilitate the consideration of SDM and the development of decision support tools. <b>Methods</b>. We conducted semi-structured interviews with experts on CPGs and SDM. We analyzed the data using Mayring's qualitative content analysis. <b>Results.</b> The 16 interviewed participants proposed several determinants of and strategies for identifying SDM-relevant recommendations. The most frequently mentioned determinant was \"multiple options with benefits and harms where choices depend on individual preferences.\" The most frequently mentioned strategy was prioritization, similar to the CPG scoping phase. Participants highlighted the role of patient partners in facilitating the consideration of SDM in CPG development but noted that a supportive culture toward both patient and public involvement and SDM is needed. The absence of standardized methods and inadequate resources hinder the consideration of SDM and the combined development of CPGs and decision support tools. The current format of CPGs was deemed overwhelming, while the inclusion of choice awareness in CPG recommendations could facilitate SDM. <b>Conclusions.</b> The identified strategies provide a starting point for CPG organizations to explore ways for integrating SDM and decision support tools into CPGs while considering context-specific barriers and facilitators. <b>Implications.</b> Further research is needed to assess the usefulness and feasibility of the proposed strategies. New policies and stronger collaboration between CPG and SDM communities appear to be needed to address identified barriers.HighlightsWe explored expert knowledge and experience on how to successfully integrate shared decision making (SDM) and decision support tools into clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).A combined development of CPGs and decision support tools was deemed essential; however, development processes often remain separate, with the CPG development group unaware of the decision support tool development group, and vice versa.In addition to stating choice awareness in CPGs, participants highlighted the critical role of patient partners in considering SDM in CPG development, but resource issues and a culture that neglects patient involvement and SDM remain.For CPG development groups to consider SDM and for health care professionals to practice it, things need to be as easy as possible.</p>","PeriodicalId":49839,"journal":{"name":"Medical Decision Making","volume":" ","pages":"272989X251368866"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X251368866","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. Awareness of shared decision making (SDM) is growing, but its integration into clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) remains challenging. We sought expert insights to identify strategies for more successfully integrating SDM and decision support tools into CPGs. Specifically, our objectives were to determine 1) how to identify CPG recommendations where SDM is most relevant and 2) what factors in CPG development hinder or facilitate the consideration of SDM and the development of decision support tools. Methods. We conducted semi-structured interviews with experts on CPGs and SDM. We analyzed the data using Mayring's qualitative content analysis. Results. The 16 interviewed participants proposed several determinants of and strategies for identifying SDM-relevant recommendations. The most frequently mentioned determinant was "multiple options with benefits and harms where choices depend on individual preferences." The most frequently mentioned strategy was prioritization, similar to the CPG scoping phase. Participants highlighted the role of patient partners in facilitating the consideration of SDM in CPG development but noted that a supportive culture toward both patient and public involvement and SDM is needed. The absence of standardized methods and inadequate resources hinder the consideration of SDM and the combined development of CPGs and decision support tools. The current format of CPGs was deemed overwhelming, while the inclusion of choice awareness in CPG recommendations could facilitate SDM. Conclusions. The identified strategies provide a starting point for CPG organizations to explore ways for integrating SDM and decision support tools into CPGs while considering context-specific barriers and facilitators. Implications. Further research is needed to assess the usefulness and feasibility of the proposed strategies. New policies and stronger collaboration between CPG and SDM communities appear to be needed to address identified barriers.HighlightsWe explored expert knowledge and experience on how to successfully integrate shared decision making (SDM) and decision support tools into clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).A combined development of CPGs and decision support tools was deemed essential; however, development processes often remain separate, with the CPG development group unaware of the decision support tool development group, and vice versa.In addition to stating choice awareness in CPGs, participants highlighted the critical role of patient partners in considering SDM in CPG development, but resource issues and a culture that neglects patient involvement and SDM remain.For CPG development groups to consider SDM and for health care professionals to practice it, things need to be as easy as possible.

将共享决策和决策支持工具整合到临床实践指南中:需要什么?定性研究。
背景。共同决策(SDM)的意识正在增长,但将其整合到临床实践指南(cpg)中仍然具有挑战性。我们寻求专家的见解,以确定更成功地将SDM和决策支持工具集成到cpg中的策略。具体来说,我们的目标是确定1)如何确定与SDM最相关的CPG建议,以及2)CPG发展中的哪些因素阻碍或促进了SDM的考虑和决策支持工具的开发。方法。我们对cpg和SDM方面的专家进行了半结构化访谈。我们使用Mayring的定性内容分析法对数据进行分析。结果。16位受访者提出了确定sdm相关建议的若干决定因素和策略。最常提到的决定因素是“多种选择的利弊取决于个人偏好。”最常提到的策略是优先排序,类似于CPG范围确定阶段。与会者强调了患者伙伴在促进CPG发展中考虑SDM方面的作用,但指出需要一种支持患者和公众参与以及SDM的文化。标准化方法的缺乏和资源的不足阻碍了SDM的考虑以及CPGs和决策支持工具的联合开发。目前的CPG格式被认为是压倒性的,而在CPG建议中加入选择意识可以促进SDM。结论。确定的策略为CPG组织提供了一个起点,可以在考虑特定环境的障碍和促进因素的同时,探索将SDM和决策支持工具集成到CPG中的方法。的影响。需要进一步的研究来评估拟议战略的有用性和可行性。似乎需要制定新的政策,加强CPG和SDM社区之间的合作,以解决已确定的障碍。我们探讨了如何成功地将共享决策(SDM)和决策支持工具整合到临床实践指南(cpg)中的专家知识和经验。CPGs和决策支持工具的联合开发被认为是必不可少的;然而,开发过程通常是分开的,CPG开发小组不知道决策支持工具开发小组,反之亦然。除了陈述CPG中的选择意识外,参与者还强调了患者合作伙伴在CPG发展中考虑SDM的关键作用,但资源问题和忽视患者参与和SDM的文化仍然存在。要让CPG开发团队考虑SDM并让医疗保健专业人员实践它,事情需要尽可能简单。
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
Medical Decision Making
Medical Decision Making 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
146
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Decision Making offers rigorous and systematic approaches to decision making that are designed to improve the health and clinical care of individuals and to assist with health care policy development. Using the fundamentals of decision analysis and theory, economic evaluation, and evidence based quality assessment, Medical Decision Making presents both theoretical and practical statistical and modeling techniques and methods from a variety of disciplines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信