Managing periodontal disease often involves complex decisions involving multiple treatment options, and patient autonomy significantly influences this decision-making process. This study aimed to characterise the autonomy and information-seeking preferences among patients diagnosed with stage III/IV periodontitis, and to identify the factors influencing these preferences.

The survey included 96 patients diagnosed with periodontal disease, all of whom underwent periodontal treatment or tooth extraction between May 2021 and February 2022. Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire incorporating the Autonomy Preference Index (API) to assess their decision-making and information-seeking preferences, along with demographic information, using a 5-point Likert scale.

Decision-making preferences were centrally distributed, with a score of 2.87 ± 0.47 (mean ± SD), indicating that most periodontal patients favoured a collaborative decision-making model. In contrast, information-seeking preferences were skewed, with a strong concentration towards the higher end of information preferences; the score was 4.55 ± 0.08. Lower age (p = 0.008) was associated with a preference for greater autonomy, while the financial burden (p = 0.034) was linked to reduced information-seeking preferences. Patients' autonomy remained relatively consistent across different periodontal clinical scenarios.

These findings suggest that periodontitis patients prefer to be well informed and share decision-making responsibilities with healthcare professionals after their diagnosis. Factors such as age and financial burden affect their autonomy, involvement and desire for information.

Active patient involvement and attention to patient preferences in patient-provider consultations are increasingly recognized as essential to improve patient satisfaction and outcomes. Aim of the review was to provide an overview of questionnaires that measure patient preferences regarding communication, information provision and involvement in decision-making in patient-provider consultations.

Inclusion criteria were studies that provided primary data, were published in German or English, and included adult patients. The systematic search was conducted in PubMed and PsycInfo. Data extraction and summary focused on information about the development process, topic and structure, and reliability of instruments.

Of 6,667 abstracts screened, 34 articles were included, describing 37 different instruments, often originating from an Anglo-American context. Twelve articles reported patient involvement in the development process. Majority of questionnaires measures aspects of information and/or decision-making preferences. Fewer instruments focus on patient-centeredness or communication preferences. Length of questionnaires varied from one to 80 items. Only 15 studies reported reliability indices.

Due to the heterogeneous description, a more consistent reporting of data would be desirable for future publications as well as more participatory research.

Although there is a wide range of questionnaires available, more research is needed to determine the extent to which they can be used in everyday clinical practice to elicit preferences from individual patients with a wide range of conditions and cultural backgrounds.

Shared decision-making in the context of medication management has been shown to be contingent on information-seeking behaviours such as patient knowledge, self-efficacy and engagement.

The aim of this study was to: (i) compare differences in perceptions of patients' knowledge, capabilities and engagement across healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients and family caregivers and (ii) investigate associations between these factors and patients' medication beliefs using a cross-sectional survey study of patients, family caregivers and community and hospital HCPs in Ireland.

Two cross-sectional surveys measuring key factors in medication management were distributed to patients and family caregivers taking three or more medicines and HCPs involved in medicines management. χ2 tests were used to investigate differences between HCPs and patients and family caregivers. Multivariable linear regression with adjustment for the socio-demographic covariates was used to examine key factors in medication management and beliefs about medicine (BMQ-General) in patients and family caregivers.

Overall, 636 responses were received; patients and family caregivers (N = 134, 21%), community (N = 313, 49%) and hospital HCPs (N = 189, 30%). A higher proportion of patients and family caregivers self-reported as 'knowledgeable' about medications (N = 76; 56.7%) than community (N = 75, 24%) and hospital HCPs (N = 44, 23.3%) (p < 0.01). The majority of patients and family caregivers were 'fairly/very confident' they could maintain an accurate medication list without assistance (N = 78; 58.2%), compared to the majority of the community (N = 213, 68.1%) and hospital HCPs (N = 114, 60.3%) who were 'not at all/somewhat confident' (p < 0.01.) These patients and family caregivers also had significantly lower overall beliefs in medication harm (β = -1.23, 95% CI: -2.34, -0.13). Patient and family caregivers who asked HCPs about their medication frequently (> 7 times per year) had higher overall beliefs in medication overuse (β = 1.88, 95% CI: 0.06, 3.69) and medication harm (β = 2.65, 95% CI: 1.10, 4.20), compared to those who never asked.

There was divergence between HCPs and patients and family caregivers in their assessments of patients' medication knowledge and capabilities. Engagement between HCPs and patients around medication should be purposeful rather than frequent, to alleviate fears about overuse and harm.

The patient and family caregiver survey was developed in partnership with members of the Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) group. Feedback was provided by the group to increase accessibility of survey and maximise distribution. In addition, the survey was piloted among members of the public involved in medication management.

Shared decision-making (SDM) is the gold standard for patient-clinician interaction, yet many patients are not actively involved in medical consultations and hesitate to engage in decisions on their health. Despite considerable efforts to improve implementation, research on barriers to SDM within the patient-clinician relationship and interaction is scant. To identify potential barriers to urological patients' participation in decision-making, we developed two novel scales assessing power asymmetry (PA-ME) and embarrassment in medical encounters (EmMed). The present study validates both scales in a large sample comprising urological patients and non-clinical participants. It further examines the effects of both factors on participation preferences and decisional conflict among patients.

Data were collected from 107 urological patients at a university hospital for Urology and Urosurgery in Germany. Patients completed self-report questionnaires before and after their clinical appointments. In addition, 250 non-clinical participants provided data via an online study. All participants rated perceived power asymmetry in the patient-clinician relationship and their experience of embarrassment in medical contexts using the PA-ME and EmMed scales. Urological patients further indicated their participation preference in decisions regarding both general and urological care prior to the consultation. Afterward, they assessed the level of perceived decisional conflict.

Factor analyses yielded power asymmetry and medical embarrassment as unidimensional constructs. Both questionnaires have good (PA-ME; α = 0.88), respectively excellent (EmMed; α = 0.95), internal consistency. Among urological patients, higher levels of perceived power asymmetry predicted lower generic participation preference (β = - 0.98, p <.001, adjusted R2 = 0.14) and higher decisional conflict (β = 0.25, p <.01, adjusted R2 = 0.07). While, in patients, embarrassment was not linked to generic participation preference before the consultation (p ≥.5), it resulted in higher decisional conflict after the consultation (β = 0.39, p <.001, adjusted R2 = 0.14). Neither power asymmetry nor embarrassment were specifically associated with participation preference regarding urological care (p ≥.273).

Given their promising psychometric properties, the new instruments are recommended for routine assessment of power asymmetry and embarrassment among patients. Addressing these factors may be helpful to reduce decisional conflict and increase participation preferences. Both factors are prerequisites for a successful SDM-process and active patient engagement in health-related decisions.

The necessity for explainability of artificial intelligence technologies in medical applications has been widely discussed and heavily debated within the literature. This paper comprises a systematized review of the arguments supporting and opposing this purported necessity. Both sides of the debate within the literature are quoted to synthesize discourse on common recurring themes and subsequently critically analyze and respond to it. While the use of autonomous black box algorithms is compellingly discouraged, the same cannot be said for the whole of medical artificial intelligence technologies that lack explainability. We contribute novel comparisons of unexplainable clinical artificial intelligence tools, diagnosis of idiopathy, and diagnoses by exclusion, to analyze implications on patient autonomy and informed consent. Applying a novel approach using comparisons with clinical practice guidelines, we contest the claim that lack of explainability compromises clinician due diligence and undermines epistemological responsibility. We find it problematic that many arguments in favour of the practical, ethical, or legal necessity of clinical artificial intelligence explainability conflate the use of unexplainable AI with automated decision making, or equate the use of clinical artificial intelligence with the exclusive use of clinical artificial intelligence.

This study aims to evaluate and compare the clinical differences in intravenous thrombolytic therapy among patients with cerebral infarction transported to the hospital by private cars versus ambulances in Jiaxing, a non-supersized city in China. It also sought to examine the impact of different transportation methods on emergency department arrival times, delays in initiating thrombolytic therapy and final clinical prognosis. The findings aim to provide a basis for optimising emergency treatment protocols and improving outcomes for patients with cerebral infarction.

Data on age, gender, height, weight, body mass index, season, time of day (day vs night), modified Rankin Scale scores, door-to-needle time (DNT) and onset-to-needle time (ONT) were retrospectively collected from 808 patients admitted to the emergency department of the Affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University for intravenous thrombolysis between January 2019 and September 2022. The data were analysed and compared.

A retrospective cohort study conducted in Jiaxing, China.

The primary outcomes were DNT and ONT.

Among the 808 eligible patients, 279 (34.53%) were transported by ambulance, and 529 (65.47%) arrived by private car. Patients in the private car group were younger on average than those in the ambulance group (aged 64.70 vs 68.41 years). Although ambulance transport resulted in shorter prehospital transportation times (113.89 vs 127.38 min), patients arriving by private car had shorter thrombolytic therapy initiation times (39.90 vs 36.30 min). At admission, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale scores were higher in the ambulance group (4 vs 2), indicating more severe conditions and a greater proportion of patients requiring bridging thrombectomy after thrombolysis (7.53% vs 3.02%).

In non-supersized cities, private car transportation for acute patients with cerebral infarction may lead to shorter DNT and ONT compared with those in ambulance transport. However, patients transported by ambulance tended to have more severe conditions, highlighting the importance of tailored emergency response strategies.

Algorithms and models increasingly support clinical and shared decision-making. However, they may be limited in effectiveness, accuracy, acceptance, and comprehensibility if they fail to consider patient preferences. Addressing this gap requires exploring methods to integrate patient preferences into model-based clinical decision-making.

This scoping review aimed to identify and map applications of computational methods for incorporating patient preferences into individualized medical decision models and to report on the types of models where these methods are applied.

This review includes articles without restriction on publication date or language, focusing on practical applications. It examines the integration of patient preferences in models for individualized clinical decision-making, drawing on diverse sources, including both white and gray literature, for comprehensive insights.

Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology, a comprehensive search was conducted across databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Cochrane Library, OpenGrey, National Technical Reports Library, and the first 20 pages of Google Scholar. Keywords related to patient preferences, medical models, decision-making, and software tools guided the search strategy. Data extraction and analysis followed the JBI framework, with an explorative analysis.

From 7074 identified and 7023 screened articles, 45 publications on specific applications were reviewed, revealing significant heterogeneity in incorporating patient preferences into decision-making tools. Clinical applications primarily target neoplasms and circulatory diseases, using methods like Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) and statistical models, often combining approaches. Studies show that incorporating patient preferences can significantly impact treatment decisions, underscoring the need for shared and personalized decision-making.

This scoping review highlights a wide range of approaches for integrating patient preferences into medical decision models, underscoring a critical gap in the use of cohesive frameworks that could enhance consistency and clinician acceptance. While the flexibility of current methods supports tailored applications, the limited use of existing frameworks constrains their potential. This gap, coupled with minimal focus on clinician and patient engagement, hinders the real-world utility of these tools. Future research should prioritize co-design with clinicians, real-world testing, and impact evaluation to close this gap and improve patient-centered care.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated potential in enhancing various aspects of healthcare, including health provider-patient communication. However, some have raised the concern that such communication may adopt implicit communication norms that deviate from what patients want or need from talking with their healthcare provider. This paper explores the possibility of using LLMs to enable patients to choose their preferred communication style when discussing their medical cases. By providing a proof-of-concept demonstration using ChatGPT-4, we suggest LLMs can emulate different healthcare provider-patient communication approaches (building on Emanuel and Emanuel's four models: paternalistic, informative, interpretive and deliberative). This allows patients to engage in a communication style that aligns with their individual needs and preferences. We also highlight potential risks associated with using LLMs in healthcare communication, such as reinforcing patients' biases and the persuasive capabilities of LLMs that may lead to unintended manipulation.

We investigate how individuals with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) seek, access, and evaluate traditional and online sources they rely on for health information.

Retrospective cross-sectional survey analysis from the United States.

Pooled Health Information National Trends Survey surveys (2013-2019).

The sample was comprised 15,316 respondents; 236/15,316 (1.54%) completed the survey in Spanish and 1727/14,734 (11.72%) had LEP (did not speak English "very well"). The sample was nationally representative across demographic categories.

Independent and dependent variables were self-reported using validated measures.

Multivariable logistic regression models using jackknife replicate weights for population estimates.

Adults with LEP were less confident in their capacity to access health information (aOR = 0.59, CI: 0.47-0.75) and had less trust in health information from medical professionals (aOR = 0.57,CI: 0.46-0.72) than English proficient (EP) adults. Although LEP and EP adults were both most likely to use the internet as their first source of information, LEP adults were more likely than EP adults to consult health professionals, print sources like books, news or brochures, family and friends, television and radio. Spanish language survey respondents were more likely to trust health information from government agencies (aOR = 1.99, CI: 1.09-3.62) and watch health-related videos on the internet than respondents who took the survey in English (aOR = 2.51, CI: 1.23-5.12).

Our results show how language barriers may contribute to health disparities experienced by linguistic minorities. Government agencies and health care organizations need to promote health information dissemination in underserved communities and may need to embrace the use of alternative information sources such as television, radio, and the internet to reach LEP populations.

In Ireland, maternity care is provided through a mixture of public and private services, with type of maternity care offered varying according to availability, clinical need and geographic location.

To explore women's perceived involvement in decisions about care depending on the maternity care pathway received.

Mixed-methods secondary analysis of data from the Irish National Maternity Experience Survey 2020. Three care pathway groups reflecting maternity care provision in Ireland were created: public care with midwives and obstetricians in hospital, private/semi-private obstetric-led care and midwifery-led care. Hierarchical multiple regression determined the association between care pathways and involvement in decisions. Free-text comments from respondents were thematically analysed.

3205 women participated (50 % response rate). 64.75 % received public care, 24.11 % received consultant-led private/semi-private care and 11.13 % received midwifery-led care. Private/semi-private care and midwifery-led care were associated with greater perceived involvement in decisions during pregnancy compared to public care. Private/semi-private care was associated with greater perceived involvement in care decisions during labour and birth and decisions in hospital after birth compared to public care. Qualitative findings identified that involvement in decisions was supported by effective communication, continuity of relationship with healthcare professionals, availability of choice and support for women's preferences.

Levels of continuity of care provided by maternity care models in Ireland may account for differences in perceived involvement in decisions.

All maternity care pathways should strive to provide continuity of care to support women to make informed choices across all stages of their maternity care.

Aim: To examine contributions of a patient advisory board (PAB) to the design and conduct of The Pulmonary Embolism Prevention after Hip and Knee Replacement (PEPPER) Trial (NCT02810704) and compare perceptions of PAB members and researchers on the Trial. Materials & methods This evaluation of the PAB was conducted by Clinical Coordinating Center (CCC) members who first discussed PAB contributions, leading to the design of a semi-structured WebEx interview individually querying PAB members on their experience. Two study team members analyzed transcriptions of the interviews for common themes, which were discussed and affirmed at an in-person meeting with PAB members. Results: The contribution most frequently cited as meaningful by PAB members was the creation of a recruitment video. In contrast, the research team considered the most impactful PAB recommendation to be omission of pneumatic compression boots as a study variable. PAB members spoke highly of their involvement in the trial and emphasized shared decision-making in the patient-physician relationship. Conclusion: Researchers and PAB members had different opinions about which PAB contributions were most impactful to the study. This likely derives from differences in perspective; PAB members focused on patient experience and the patient-surgeon relationship while researchers focused primarily on trial outcomes. PAB contributions led to two major protocol changes that had a substantial positive effect on trial design, recruitment and enrollment. This evaluation adds to the engagement literature, which contains little on what patients think of their involvement in the design and conduct of clinical research studies and will aid in encouraging treatment preference discussions between patient and surgeon, thereby supporting the goal of improved patient outcomes.

Narcolepsy is a rare, chronic sleep disorder with significant impacts on the quality of life of people affected by the disorder. People with narcolepsy (PWN) are a diverse patient population with evolving symptoms, comorbidities, and perspectives. As PWN have varying needs, clinicians should consider a more personalized approach to therapy, including active participation of PWN in their care and shared decision-making between patient and clinician to achieve optimal outcomes. In this review, we discuss the various characteristics and challenges of PWN, present illustrative clinical case scenarios of PWN, provide clinicians with a proposed framework to best address therapy for PWN, and demystify concerns with sodium oxybate.

Patient education and dialogue are important when choosing a future treatment strategy for patients with chronic kidney disease. To support patients in their decision-making process, it is critical to provide information in a way that patients can understand. This study was conducted to understand how nephrologists view the goals of information sharing, the challenges involved, and the strategies used as part of treatment planning.

This study had a qualitative design using semi-structured interviews with 14 practicing nephrologists working in different hospitals in Sweden and with experience in providing information to patients approaching the need for dialysis. The interviews were conducted in 2022. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

The results are presented thematically under the headings Objectives, Content, Challenges, and Strategies. Participants tried to find common ground with patients, in terms of shared knowledge, shared views on the appropriate decision-making process, and ultimately also agreement on which treatment option was best. There was a tension between allowing patients to make their own decisions and guiding patients to make decisions with the best outcomes as judged by the nephrologist. Achieving common ground was not always possible, both because of factors related to the patient's preferences or limited capacity, and because of boundaries set by the physician to protect the patient from unwarranted or harmful information. Dealing with competing sources of information was seen as challenging. The nephrologists felt a professional responsibility for their treatment recommendations, combined with uncertainty about which patient would benefit from dialysis and when to start.

Planning future treatment for patients with chronic kidney disease involves a complex information process that leaves room for both paternalism and respect for autonomy. Nephrologists face many competing challenges when discussing treatment options with patients. These challenges should be taken into account in the development of support for nephrologists in the area of information sharing.

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Patients do not always receive enough information about their diagnosis and their perceived participation in decision-making about their treatment is low. Some participants reported feeling very uncertain when the physician invited them to choose between these options. Others users expressed their satisfaction with the trend away from paternalistic attitudes in the health system. There is a trend towards pharmacological prescription as a first approximation. This contrasts with the recommendations of scientific organizations based on evidence and cost-effectiveness studies on the offer of psychological interventions as the first option. The user groups pointed out that active coping, based on exposure to anxiety-generating situations, made a significant contribution to alleviating their anxiety disorders. However, some of those interviewed rejected this type of intervention. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: Users diagnosed with anxiety disorders miss more information about the disorder and participation in its treatment. Opposite positions coexist in terms of participation in the choice of treatment. Pharmacological treatment is most commonly the first option offered. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: This study is an example in itself of the involvement of users in the healthcare process, and therefore placing them at the centre of attention, as reflected in healthcare policies and clinical practice guidelines. It promotes the identification of needs that users diagnosed of anxiety disorders may have, with the aim of putting in place, from healthcare professionals and health services, the necessary supports adapted to these. Mental health nurses are well-positioned to offer support and guidance during the process of involvement and shared decision-making.

INTRODUCTION: An essential aspect of mental health treatment and recovery is the degree of involvement by health service users in the process.

Explore the values, demands and preferences of persons diagnosed with anxiety disorders, their participation in the treatment provided, and the response of the health system in this regard.

A qualitative study was conducted, with 51 participants. Nine focus groups and four in-depth interviews took place.

Three broad categories were identified: (1) diagnosis; (2) treatment options offered and shared decision-making; and (3) coping with the disorder. Sometimes patients do not receive enough information to cover their needs. A trend towards drug prescription as a first approach was observed, while active coping based on exposure to anxiogenic situations was indicated as the most effective option.

Shared decision-making is a necessary aspect of treatment, and the therapeutic process should be adapted to match the service user's preferences, values and needs.

This research identifies the needs of patients diagnosed with anxiety disorders and promotes, therefore, from healthcare professionals and services, the provision of measures to meet these needs.

Diabetes affects half of the patients with cystic fibrosis who are aged 30 years and older. Diabetes progresses asymptomatically over a long period of time. Two treatment options are possible: start insulin as soon as cystic fibrosis diagnosis is made with the additional constraints of cystic fibrosis or wait while monitoring the patient's clinical condition and start insulin when diabetes symptoms develop and therefore later. This situation is particularly well suited to shared decision-making (SDM) between the physician (health care team) and patient/relatives.

The aim of this study was to perform qualitative and quantitative analyses for evaluating the outcomes and experience of SDM implementation between the physician/health care team trained for SDM and patients/their relatives for cystic fibrosis-related diabetes.

A quasi-experimental with a comparison study will be developed. Three cystic fibrosis reference centers (CFRCs) will be trained in SDM by using a web-based training, including a validated decision aid and coaching for physicians and the medical team. Two control CFRCs will maintain their usual practices. A qualitative analysis through observation of consultations, individual semistructured interviews with patients, and focus groups in CFRCs will be conducted based on a thematic content analysis. Questionnaires related to decision-making and experience of decision-making with and without SDM implementation will be administered to patients and physicians.

Forty patients will be included (8 patients in each center), that is, 60 consultation observations (2 consultations per patient in the intervention groups given the modalities of the SDM process) will be conducted in 2025. Eight focus groups will be conducted in the 5 centers (2 groups in each intervention CFRC and 1 group in each control CFRC). This qualitative corpus plus responses to the patient and physician questionnaires will make it possible to know whether the practice of SDM in CFRCs is increased by an implementation strategy and to analyze the experience of patients and their relatives regarding decision-making modalities. Analysis of the outcomes and experience of the implementation of SDM are of importance to identify the facilitators and barriers to SDM from patients' and CFRCs' point of views.

Our study will give us keys to adapt, improve, and disseminate SDM more widely in the context of cystic fibrosis therapy. SDM could thus be used in routine clinical practice in CFRCs at the national level.

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04891159; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04891159?id=NCT04891159.

PRR1-10.2196/62931.

Shared decision-making (SDM) is crucial for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management due to the complexity of treatment options. This systematic review sought to understand T2DM patients' preferences and diabetes care providers' perspectives regarding SDM, and the barriers and facilitators to SDM.

Five databases were searched from 2000 to 2023 (Medline/PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Embase). All included papers were quantitative and qualitative studies regarding preferences of patients with T2DM for SDM, perspectives of providers on SDM, and their barriers and facilitators to SDM. Quantitative findings were extracted as percentages, and qualitative findings were extracted as presented in the original research paper. Study selection was carried out independently by two authors, with discrepancies resolved by consensus and by consultation with the supervisor. The Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Qualitative Research and for Cross Sectional Studies was used to evaluate the risk of bias of included papers.

Thirty-four studies were included in this review; 22 focused on T2DM patients' decision-making preferences, 7 focused on perspectives of diabetes care providers, and 5 addressed both. Of the 27 studies of T2DM patients, 20 (ten quantitative and ten qualitative studies) reported that respondents preferred and valued SDM and wanted to make decisions in collaboration with a provider. Of the 12 studies of providers, only 5 reported that providers had positive views towards SDM and preferred to involve patients in decision-making. A comprehensive list of SDM facilitators and barriers included patient factors (facilitators like higher health literacy and motivation, and barriers like blind trust in physicians and poor health), provider factors (facilitators like a physician's information-giving behavior and medical knowledge/technical skills, and barriers like a paternalistic attitude and poor interpersonal style), and context factors (facilitators like physician accessibility and availability, and barriers like a lack of system support and low continuity).

Although SDM is important for most patients living with diabetes, the evidence from included studies suggest that providers in diabetes practice do not universally express positive views towards SDM. Because T2DM patients and their providers need to work together to implement the SDM approach satisfactorily, there is a need to encourage more providers to do so.

To assess stakeholders' perspectives on integrating personalized risk scores (PRS) into left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation decisions and how these perspectives might impact shared decision making (SDM).

We conducted 40 in-depth interviews with physicians, nurse coordinators, patients, and caregivers about integrating PRS into LVAD implantation decisions. A codebook was developed to identify thematic patterns, and quotations were consolidated for analysis. We used Thematic Content Analysis in MAXQDA software to identify themes by abstracting relevant quotes.

Clinicians had varying preferences regarding PRS integration into LVAD decision making, while patients and caregivers preferred real-time discussions about PRS with their physicians. Physicians voiced concerns about time constraints and suggested delegating PRS discussions to advanced practice providers or nurse coordinators.

Integrating PRS information into LVAD decision aids presents both opportunities and challenges for SDM. Given variable preferences among clinicians and patients, clinicians should elicit patients' desired role in the decision-making process. Addressing time constraints and ensuring patient-centered care will be crucial for optimizing SDM. Practice implications Clinicians should elicit patient preferences for PRS information disclosure and address challenges, such as time constraints and delegation of PRS discussions to other team members.

Patient experience surveys gather information on various aspects of care via numerous survey items. Identifying the most critical areas of patient experience to prioritize for quality care improvement can be challenging. The objective of this study was to determine which care experience items are the drivers influencing patients' overall rating of cancer care.

Data from 2750 adult patients with cancer from the second wave of the Swiss Cancer Patient Experiences study were analyzed. This cross-sectional survey was conducted in eight Swiss hospitals from September 2021 to February 2022. Stepwise logistic regression examined the relationship between overall care rating and 29 patient experience items covering different patient-centered care dimensions while adjusting for sociodemographic and health variables.

Overall, patients rated their cancer care experience at 8.9 out of 10. Stepwise regression identified seven drivers contributing to overall care rating. The strongest drivers were "professionals worked well together" (odds ratio [OR], 4.81) and "tests were not repeated" (OR, 2.09) from the coordination and integration dimension, "offered support for symptoms during treatment" (OR, 2.11) from the physical comfort dimension, followed by "hospital staff ensured available home support" (OR, 1.99), "offered to see health professional for concerns" (OR, 1.91), "treatment options were explained" (OR, 1.75), and "involved in treatment decisions as desired" (OR, 1.68).

This study evaluated the care experiences of patients with cancer with a comprehensive tool that identified seven key factors independently associated with overall care rating. By concentrating on these areas, hospitals can not only improve the patient care experience but also efficiently allocate resources to quality improvement initiatives.

Shared decision making (SDM) between health care professionals and patients is essential to help patients make well informed choices about lung cancer screening (LCS). Patients who participate in SDM have greater LCS knowledge, reduced decisional conflict, and improved adherence to annual screening compared with patients who do not participate in SDM. SDM tools are acceptable to patients and clinicians. The importance of SDM in LCS is emphasized in recommendations from professional organizations and highlighted as a priority in the 2022 President's Cancer Panel Report. The updated 2022 national coverage determination from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services reaffirms the value of SDM in offering LCS to eligible beneficiaries. The Shared Decision-Making Task Group of the American Cancer Society National Lung Cancer Roundtable undertook a group consensus process to identify priorities for research and implementation related to SDM for LCS and then evaluated current knowledge in these areas. Priority areas included: (1) developing feasible, adaptable SDM training programs for health care professionals; (2) understanding the impact of alternative health system LCS models on SDM practice and outcomes; (3) developing and evaluating new patient decision aids for use with diverse populations and in varied settings; (4) offering conceptual clarity about what constitutes a high-quality decision and developing appropriate quality measures; and (5) studying the use of prediction-augmented screening to support SDM in practice. Gaps in current research in all areas were observed. The authors conclude with a research and implementation agenda to advance the quality and implementation of SDM for persons who might benefit from LCS.

This study aimed to investigate how doctor-patient communication, trust in doctors impacted patients' experience and satisfaction in shared decision-making (SDM).

This study is based on the data from a cross-sectional survey (n = 12,401) conducted in 27 public specialist outpatient clinics in Hong Kong.

The multivariable regression models revealed that doctors' better communication skills were associated with lower decision-making involvement (odd ratio, 0.75 [95 % CI, 0.88-0.94], P < .001) but higher satisfaction with involvement (odd ratio, 6.88 [95 % CI, 5.99-7.93], P < .001). Similarly, longer consultation durations were associated with reduced involvement in decision-making (odd ratio, 0.71 [95 % CI, 0.66-0.73], P < .001) but increased satisfaction with involvement (odd ratio, 1.91 [95 % CI, 1.80-2.04], P < .001). Trust in doctors significantly mediated these associations, except for the association between consultation duration and patients' satisfaction with decision-making involvement.

Doctors' better communication skills and longer consultations might not necessarily increase patient involvement in SDM but correlated with increased satisfaction with involvement. Trust in doctors emerged as a mediator for participation and satisfaction in decision-making.

Clinics should consider patients' preferences and capabilities when tailoring communication strategies about decision-making and optimizing patient satisfaction.

Most research on people undergoing lower limb amputations for dysvascular disease summarizes average patient outcome risks and average associations between patient factors and these outcomes. More recently, the importance of predicting patient-specific outcomes based on individual factors (ie, personalized rehabilitation) has become evident. This article reviews the evidence and discusses the importance of the following: (1) predicting outcomes to facilitate amputation-level and prosthesis prescription decisions and (2) how prediction models can be leveraged to develop decision support tools to facilitate provider/patient shared decision-making to ensure decisions considering each individual patient's priorities and preferences. Examples of these tools are discussed and referenced.

Information disclosures are used in medicine to provide patients with relevant information. This research examines whether patients are less likely to discuss medical conditions with their physicians after seeing an insurance information disclosure.

Three experimental studies with nonprobability online samples (ntotal = 875 US adult participants) examined the impact of information disclosures on patients' likelihood of disclosing symptoms to providers, using new symptoms and preexisting chronic conditions. The effects of insurance disclosures were also compared to those of pharmaceutical discount disclosures.

These studies demonstrate that information disclosures can result in unintended consequences for patients and providers. Results showed that information disclosures about insurance claims significantly negatively affected willingness to discuss health information with providers. This effect was consistent for both new health concerns, b = -0.661, P < 0.001 (study 1, n = 250) and b = -0.893, P < 0.001 (study 3, n = 375), as well as chronic conditions, b = -1.175, P < .001 (study 2, n = 250); all studies were conducted in January 2023. Information provided to patients about pharmaceutical savings did not similarly affect willingness to discuss symptoms with providers.

These were experimental studies with hypothetical scenarios. Future research is needed to understand how patients react to information disclosures in a physician's office. Future research is also needed to examine the role of specific wording and tone used in information disclosures.

Prior research has shown that patients prefer more information and to be involved in their medical decisions; however, these studies demonstrate that some information disclosures can discourage full communication between patients and physicians.

This research has important implications for the potential consequences of information disclosures in health care settings. Information disclosures should be presented in a way that will not discourage candid discussions of patient symptoms.

This research found that information disclosures about insurance claims can negatively affect patient willingness to discuss health information with providers.Information disclosures may sometimes fall short of their intended purpose of aiding patient decisions with the goal of improved well-being.When information disclosures are focused on warning about potential new costs, patients may feel uncomfortable discussing new symptoms with their providers.Findings suggest patients may often be more concerned with costs than with addressing their ongoing health problems.

This study aimed to explore how incorporating shared decision-making (SDM) can address recruitment challenges in clinical trials. Specifically, it examines how SDM can align the trial process with patient preferences, enhance patient autonomy and increase active patient participation. Additionally, it identifies potential conflicts between SDM and certain clinical trial aspects, such as randomization or blinding, and proposes solutions to mitigate these issues.

We conducted a comprehensive review of existing literature on patient recruitment challenges in clinical trials and the role of SDM in addressing these challenges. We analysed case studies and trial reports to identify common obstacles and assess the effectiveness of SDM in improving patient accrual. Additionally, we evaluated three proposed solutions: adequate trial design, communication skill training and patient decision aids.

Our review indicates that incorporating SDM can significantly enhance patient recruitment by promoting patient autonomy and engagement. SDM encourages physicians to adopt a more open and informative approach, which aligns the trial process with patient preferences and reduces psychological barriers such as fear and mental stress. However, implementing SDM can conflict with elements such as randomization and blinding, potentially complicating trial design and execution.

The desire for patient autonomy and active engagement through SDM may clash with traditional clinical trial methodologies. To address these conflicts, we propose three solutions: redesigning trials to better accommodate SDM principles, providing communication skill training for physicians and developing patient decision aids. By focussing on patient wishes and emotions, these solutions can integrate SDM into clinical trials effectively.

Shared decision-making provides a framework that can promote patient recruitment and trial participation by enhancing patient autonomy and engagement. With proper implementation of trial design modifications, communication skill training and patient decision aids, SDM can support rather than hinder clinical trial execution, ultimately contributing to the advancement of evidence-based medicine.

Little is known about patients' or carers' reported experiences of dental care provided using dental behaviour support (DBS) techniques. Qualitative literature can provide unique insight into these experiences.

To explore and synthesize qualitative literature related to patient experience of dental behaviour support.

A PROSPERO-registered systematic review of qualitative articles was undertaken. Studies were identified through MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO. Abstracts were screened by two reviewers and data were extracted to summarize the qualitative findings included within them. A thematic summary approach was used to synthesize the qualitative data identified.

Twenty-three studies were included. Studies primarily explored experiences of dental care of children by speaking to their parents (n = 16), particularly regarding paediatric dental general anaesthesia (DGA) (n = 8). Studies of adults' experiences of DBS (n = 7) covered a range of techniques. Nine studies explored broader dental care experiences and did not study specific DBS approaches. A thematic synthesis identified five themes applicable across the studies identified: Trust and the therapeutic alliance supporting effective care delivery; considered information sharing often alleviated anticipatory anxiety; control and autonomy-reduced anxieties; variations in the perceived treatment successes and failures of DBS techniques; and DBS techniques produced longer positive and negative impacts on patients beyond direct care provision.

Qualitative research has been under-utilized in research on DBS techniques. Care experiences of most DBS techniques outside of paediatric DGA are poorly understood. Building trust with patients and enabling autonomy appear to support positive patient-reported experiences of care.

Many psychological factors may have a significant bearing on an individual's oral health and success of dental treatments. Overall, these factors may result in the avoidance of dental visits, emergency-based dental appointments, noncompliant dental behavior, the utilization of multiple oral health care providers, and poor oral health. These factors may affect the quality of life of individuals and may lead to patient dissatisfaction, poor prognosis, and failure of dental treatment. Multiple psychological factors may affect the dentist and the patient. Those factors may alter the prognosis for successful dental treatment. Physician empathy is fundamental in developing long-term physician-patient trust.

Through the lens of self-determination theory, this quantitative study investigates how patient-provider collaboration through perceived shared decision-making (SDM) and autonomy support impact type 2 diabetes (T2D) outcomes.

We sampled 474 individuals over 18 years old who self-identified as having T2D. Completed and valid responses were received from 378 participants from two separate groups in an online survey. Data was analyzed using the IBM Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), AMOS package, version 28, and Mplus, version 8.8.

Patient-provider collaboration through autonomy support improved treatment satisfaction (β = .16, ρ < .05) and self-management adherence (β = .43, ρ < .001). While collaboration through SDM improved treatment satisfaction (β = .25, ρ < .01), it worsened SM adherence (β = -.31, ρ < .001). The negative impact of SDM on self-management adherence was mitigated by our moderator, coping ability. However, coping ability minimally impacted treatment satisfaction and SM adherence when autonomous support was provided.

Autonomy support increases treatment satisfaction and self-management adherence. SDM enhances treatment satisfaction but may adversely affect self-management adherence. The study also suggests that coping ability can mitigate the negative effect of SDM on self-management adherence, although its influence is limited when autonomy support is provided by the provider.

For providers, SDM and autonomy support permits shared power over treatment decisions while fostering independence over self-management tasks. Providers should evaluate patients' coping ability and adapt their approach to care based on the patient's coping capacity.

This study aimed to investigate how shared decision-making (SDM) and the use of different types of outcome information are applied in routine care management for people with multiple sclerosis (MS) in an academic outpatient clinic.

This qualitative study used the following: (a) observations of clinical encounters (N = 23) between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs), (b) interviews with those patients (N = 17) and (c) interviews with those HCPs (N = 7). HCPs were not trained in SDM before the study. Audio recordings were transcribed literally. Transcriptions were analysed using qualitative thematic analysis.

Outcome information was hardly discussed with patients, apart from clinical outcome information at an individual level, such as MRI or lab results. This use of clinical outcome information did not automatically lead to a process of SDM. HCPs tended to implicitly present choices to patients after signalling and discussing 'problems'. In the interviews, patients indicated that they tended to consent to the advice given by HCPs and to prefer not too much change in treatment plans. However, they also emphasized the importance of being informed about available options with benefits and harms. We observed multiple discussions about patients' preferences, especially related to patients' experiences and priorities.

Overall, SDM and the use of different types of outcome information did not seem to be enacted in routine care management for people with MS, mostly because choices were not explicitly mentioned or discussed. However, discussions about patients' experiences and priorities did take place. Training HCPs further and developing patient information seem reasonable steps to proceed.

People with MS contributed as research participants and provided us with their experiences in interviews. Furthermore, representatives of two patient organizations contributed to the study by reviewing the interview protocol for people with MS.

Background and objective Shared decision-making (SDM) in healthcare has transitioned from a paternalistic model to a collaborative approach, particularly significant in chronic disease management. This shift focuses on aligning healthcare decisions with patient preferences and values, thereby enhancing patient engagement and treatment adherence. However, patient preferences regarding involvement in SDM vary widely, influenced by demographic, disease-specific, psychological, cultural, and social factors. This study aimed to explore patient preferences related to SDM in chronic disease management in Saudi Arabia, by assessing attitudes toward SDM, the impact of decision aids, and the role of clinician communication in influencing these preferences. Methods A cross-sectional survey design was employed, involving 409 adult outpatients with chronic diseases attending four public hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Participants were selected using purposive and convenience sampling. The survey, translated into Arabic, collected demographic data and information on preferences and experiences in decision-making, communication, and information sharing. The data were analyzed using SPSS Statistics (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) to identify patterns and correlations. Results Key findings indicated a strong preference among the participants for involvement in treatment decisions (n=303, 74.2%) and clear communication using layman's terms (n=338, 82.6%). Major barriers to active participation in SDM included lack of time during appointments (n=275, 67.2%), difficulty understanding medical terminology (n=220, 53.9%), and feeling intimidated to ask questions (297, 72.6%). Comfort in SDM was highest in the age group of 41-50 years [mean=4.16, standard deviation (SD)=28.44; F=2.3287, p=0.0739]. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the age group of 18-30 years (mean=3.42, SD=1.09; F=3.0503, p=0.0284). Conclusions Our findings highlight the need for incorporating patient preferences into chronic disease management strategies to enhance engagement and satisfaction.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation is a challenging treatment characterized by multiple morbidities, the need for long-term care, and a significant mortality risk. Consequently, close patient and physician communication throughout treatment is crucial. We aimed to review the literature examining patient and physician communication around critical aspects experienced by allogeneic survivors over the transplantation trajectory, such as the informed consent process, transplantation-related morbidity (eg, psychosocial distress, cognitive dysfunction, sexuality), adherence to treatment, and the use of complementary and alternative medicine, as well as interventions and strategies to improve patient and physician communication. We found a paucity of studies examining communication on these topics. Nevertheless, there is evidence of significant communication gaps around morbidities often experienced by allogeneic survivors, such as psychosocial distress, fatigue, and sexual functioning, due to both patient and physician barriers. Similarly, there is a concern that gaps also exist when addressing the informed consent process, cognitive dysfunction, adherence to treatment, and use of complementary and alternative medicine. The use and discussion of patient-reported outcome measures as part of clinical care is associated with patient and physician satisfaction with communication and better detection and management of symptoms. Although other strategies, such as decision aids, question prompt lists, and communication skills training, have improved communication in oncology, they have not been tested in the allogeneic setting. Future research is clearly needed to examine patient and physician communication in the allogeneic transplantation setting and test strategies to improve communication during this challenging treatment.

Our study aimed to evaluate the integration level of non-pharmacological management (NPM) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), analyze attitudes, practices, and perceived barriers towards NPM implementation, and identify factors contributing to the underutilization of non-pharmacological treatment in RA.

A descriptive and analytical cross-sectional study was conducted among rheumatologists in Morocco. Rheumatologists received an online questionnaire gathering sociodemographic data, NPM integration level for RA, exploring their attitudes, practices and perceived barriers regarding the integration of NPM for RA, using a Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5. Univariate analyses were conducted to identify risk factors for under-integration of NPM for RA.

Out of 440 questionnaires sent, 132 rheumatologists responded to the survey (mean age of 44 ±12 years, 112 (84.8%) females, median professional experience of 15 years [4.7; 26.3]) with a response rate of 30%. All rheumatologists agreed on the importance of NPM integration into their practice with 130 (98.5%) supporting the necessity of tailored recommendations of NPM of RA for the Moroccan context. Sixty-nine (52.3%) reported a lack of NPM integration for RA. Only 36 (27.3%) consistently provided personalized NPM from RA diagnosis and 47 (35.6%) involved patients in decision-making. Comment perceived barriers included difficulties in organizing multidisciplinary care (122; 92.4%), difficulties with time management in consultation (119; 90.2%), and lack of multidisciplinary team members (116; 87.9%). In univariate analysis, lack of suitable training and lack of knowledge on NPM of RA were risk factors of under-integration of NPM of RA with respectively an odds ratio (OR) of 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01-0.86 and OR of 0.34, 95% CI: 0.15-0.76.

Our study revealed significant insufficiencies in the integration of NPM of RA among Moroccan rheumatologists. Perceived barriers, including insufficient training, lack of knowledge, and infrastructural limitations, hinder effective implementation. Addressing these through tailored education and multidisciplinary collaboration is essential for improving RA management.

In recent decades, there has been a growing emphasis on involving patients in healthcare decision-making, driven by political, ethical, and research considerations. Although patient involvement is associated with improved health outcomes, understanding patient preferences regarding their role in decision-making is crucial for effective interventions. The Control Preferences Scale (CPS) measures patient preferences along a continuum from passive to active participation. However, its application in Denmark necessitates translation and cultural adaptation.

This study aimed to translate and culturally adapt the CPS for Danish use across diverse healthcare settings: acute care, cancer care, elective surgery, chronic medical treatment, and parental involvement in pediatric care. Following a cross-sectional design, the translation process was systematically planned and executed using Beaton's guidelines, including the five stages: forward and back translation, synthesis, expert review, and pre-testing.

The translation and adaption process was carried out successfully. Few linguistic challenges were identified and resolved by the expert review. The findings of the pre-testing indicated high acceptability and usability of the adapted CPS among 152 Danish patients and parents. The collaborative role emerged as the most preferred across settings (69.8%), with passive roles more prevalent among cancer patients (30%) and parents waiting with their child to see a pediatrician (23.3%). Notable, more women preferred collaborative or active roles (83.9%) than men (73.9%). The content validity assessment yielded positive feedback, affirming the relevance and comprehensiveness of the CPS.

In summary, the adaptation and validation of the CPS for Danish use proved successful, providing a valuable tool for assessing patient's role preferences in healthcare decision-making. However, future studies are recommended to ensure construct validity and reliability through psychometric testing.

Evaluating readiness for discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU) is a critical aspect of patient care. Whereas evidence-based criteria for ICU admission have been established, practical criteria for discharge from the ICU are lacking. Often discharge guidelines simply state that a patient no longer meets ICU admission criteria. Such discharge criteria can be interpreted differently by different healthcare providers, leaving a clinical void where misunderstandings of patients' readiness can conflict with perceptions of what readiness means for patients, families, and healthcare providers. In considering ICU discharge readiness, the use and application of ethical principles may be helpful in mitigating such conflicts and achieving desired patient outcomes. Ethical principles propose different ways of understanding what readiness might mean and how clinicians might weigh these principles in their decision-making process. This article examines the concept of discharge readiness through the lens of the most widely cited ethical principles (autonomy [respect for persons], nonmaleficence/beneficence, and justice) and provides a discussion of their application in the critical care environment. Ongoing bioethics discourse and empirical research are needed to identify factors that help determine discharge readiness within critical care environments that will ultimately promote safe and effective ICU discharges for patients and their families.

The emergence of shared decision-making (SDM) in the field of medical education represents a significant shift in the way how health care is being taught to medical students and practiced by healthcare professionals. The purpose of the current review is to explore the merits of SDM to students and patients, identify the prevailing challenges in its successful implementation, and suggest appropriate solutions to overcome them. An extensive search of all materials related to the topic was performed on the PubMed search engine, and a total of 20 articles were selected. The process of implementation of SDM in medical education can turn out to be extremely challenging due to a wide range of factors. In conclusion, training medical students in the domain of SDM is crucial to cultivate the skills and attitudes that are indispensable for future healthcare professionals. The need of the hour is to identify the prevailing challenges and address them by adopting a multifaceted approach.

To explore 1) the level of shared decision-making (SDM) participation in intraocular lens (IOL) selection in cataract patients and the factors that influence this participation and 2) the relationships between preparation for decision-making (PrepDM)and the level of SDM participation and satisfaction with the decision (SWD). Provide guidance for improving SDM in ophthalmology.

176 cataract patients were asked to complete the PrepDM scale, the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and the SWD instrument in IOL decision-making process. Multiple linear regression was used to analyze the influencing factors of the level of SDM. The Process program and bootstrap sampling method was used to test whether the level of participation in SDM was a mediating variable among the three.

The SDM-Q-9 median score was 77.78 (IQR 31.11-88.89). Patients with a history of surgery in the operative eye (P=0.022) or PrepDM <60 points (P<0.001) had lower SDM-Q-9 scores than patients with no history of surgery in the operative eye or PrepDM ≥60 points. Patients with an education level lower than primary school had lower SDM-Q-9 scores than patients with other education levels (P<0.05). The PrepDM of cataract patients was positively correlated with the level of SDM (r=0.768, P<0.001) and with the SWD (r=0.727, P<0.001), and the level of SDM was positively correlated with the SWD (r=0.856, P<0.001). The level of SDM fully mediated PrepDM and SDW, with a mediating effect value of 0.128 and a mediating effect of 86.66% of the total effect.

The SDM of cataract patients involved in IOL selection was in the upper middle range. Education, history of surgery in the operated eye, and PrepDM were factors that influenced the level of SDM. The level of participation in SDM fully mediated the relationship between PrepDM and SWD.

Breast imaging clinics in the United States (U.S.) are increasingly implementing breast cancer risk assessment (BCRA) to align with evolving guideline recommendations but with limited uptake of risk-reduction care. Effectively communicating risk information to women is central to implementation efforts, but remains understudied in the U.S. This study aims to characterize, and identify factors associated with women's interest in and preferences for breast cancer risk communication.

This is a cross-sectional survey study of U.S. women presenting for a mammogram between January and March of 2021 at a large, tertiary breast imaging clinic. Survey items assessed women's interest in knowing their risk and preferences for risk communication if considered to be at high risk in hypothetical situations. Multivariable logistic regression modeling assessed factors associated with women's interest in knowing their personal risk and preferences for details around exact risk estimates.

Among 1119 women, 72.7% were interested in knowing their breast cancer risk. If at high risk, 77% preferred to receive their exact risk estimate and preferred verbal (52.9% phone/47% in-person) vs. written (26.5% online/19.5% letter) communications. Adjusted regression analyses found that those with a primary family history of breast cancer were significantly more interested in knowing their risk (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0, 2.1, p = 0.04), while those categorized as "more than one race or other" were significantly less interested in knowing their risk (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2, 0.9, p = 0.02). Women 60 + years of age were significantly less likely to prefer exact estimates of their risk (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.5, 0.98, p < 0.01), while women with greater than a high school education were significantly more likely to prefer exact risk estimates (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.5, 4.2, p < 0.001).

U.S. women in this study expressed strong interest in knowing their risk and preferred to receive exact risk estimates verbally if found to be at high risk. Sociodemographic and family history influenced women's interest and preferences for risk communication. Breast imaging centers implementing risk assessment should consider strategies tailored to women's preferences to increase interest in risk estimates and improve risk communication.

Studies examining the effects of incorporating patients' preferences into treatment outcomes highlight their impact on crucial aspects such as reduced dropout rates and enhanced effectiveness. Recognizing individuals' rights to participate in decisions about their treatments underscores the importance of studying treatment preferences and the factors influencing these choices.

This study aims to identify treatment preferences (psychological, pharmacological, or combined) among a sample of patients and to discern the psychosocial and clinical factors influencing these preferences.

A total of 2,133 individuals receiving care at a community mental health unit completed assessments on anxious-depressive symptoms, social and occupational adjustment, and their treatment preference. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS, with descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests, and one-way ANOVA applied.

Preferences for treatments were distributed as follows: Combined (49.8%), psychological (33%), and pharmacological (10.6%). Factors such as diagnosis, severity of depressive and anxious symptoms, and functional impact were related to treatment preference with a moderate effect size. Meanwhile, various sociodemographic factors correlated with the selected treatment, though with a weak effect size.

There is a pronounced preference for combined treatments. The significance of psychological treatments is evident, as four out of five participants favored them in their choices. Addressing these preferences calls for an exploration within the broader context of prescription freedom in mental health.

Dialysis might not benefit all older patients with kidney failure, particularly those with multimorbid conditions and frailty. Patients' and healthcare professionals' awareness of the presence of geriatric impairments could improve outcomes by tailoring treatment plans and decisions for individual patients.

We aimed to explore the perspectives of patients and healthcare professionals on nephrology-tailored geriatric assessment to fuel decision-making for treatment choices in older patients with kidney failure.

In an exploratory qualitative study using focus groups, participants discussed perspectives on the use and value of nephrology-tailored geriatric assessment for the decision-making process to start or forego dialysis.

Patients (n = 18) with kidney failure, caregivers (n = 4), and professionals (n = 25) were purposively sampled from 10 hospitals. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and inductively analysed using thematic analysis.

Three main themes emerged that supported or impeded decision-making in kidney failure: (1) patient psycho-social situation; (2) patient-related factors on modality choice; (3) organisation of health care. Patients reported feeling vulnerable due to multiple chronic conditions, old age, experienced losses in life and their willingness to trade longevity for quality of life. Professionals recognised the added value of nephrology-tailored geriatric assessment in three major themes: (i) facilitating continual holistic assessment, (ii) filling the knowledge gap, and (iii) uncovering important patient characteristics.

nephrology-tailored geriatric assessment was perceived as a valuable tool to identify geriatric impairments in older patients with kidney failure. Integration of its outcomes can facilitate a more holistic approach to inform choices and decisions about kidney replacement therapy.

To determine how decision making interventions for use in advanced cancer treatment consultations function and whether they increase perceptions of shared decision making (SDM) behaviours within consultations.

A systematic search of five literature databases was conducted. Evaluations of decision making interventions where participants faced active treatment decisions for stage 4 or otherwise incurable cancer were included. Intervention descriptions were coded using Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs) to provide a narrative of how the interventions function. A narrative synthesis of interventions effect on perceptions of SDM behaviours compared to usual care was conducted.

Four studies presenting different interventions were included. Education, training, modelling and enablement intervention functions were identified. Oncologist SDM training alone and combined with a patient communication aid demonstrated the only significant effect (p < 0.05) on SDM behaviours in advanced cancer consultations.

Healthcare professional (HCP) SDM training which includes modelling and enablement functions may be effective in increasing clinician motivation, capability and opportunity to facilitate SDM in advanced cancer consultations.

Implementing HCP SDM training into practice may encourage greater uptake of SDM which may lead to treatment decisions concordant with the goals of care of people with advanced cancer.

Nudging, a behavioral economics concept, subtly influences decision-making without coercion or limiting choice. Despite its frequent use, the specific application of nudging techniques by clinicians in shared decision-making (SDM) is understudied. Our aim was to analyze clinicians' use of nudging in a curated dataset of family care conferences in the PICU.

Between 2019 and 2020, we retrospectively studied and coded 70 previously recorded care conference transcripts that involved physicians and families from 2015 to 2019. We focused on decision-making discussions examining instances of nudging, namely salience, framing, options, default, endowment, commission, omission, recommend, expert opinion, certainty, and social norms. Nudging instances were categorized by decision type, including tracheostomy, goals of care, or procedures.

Single-center quaternary pediatric facility with general and cardiac ICUs.

None.

None.

We assessed the pattern and frequency of nudges in each transcript.

Sixty-three of the 70 transcripts contained SDM episodes. These episodes represented a total of 11 decision categories based on the subject matter of nudging instances, with 308 decision episodes across all transcripts (median [interquartile range] 5 [4-6] per conference). Tracheostomy was the most frequently discussed decision. A total of 1096 nudging instances were identified across the conferences, with 8 (6-10) nudge types per conference. The most frequent nudging strategy used was gain frame (203/1096 [18.5%]), followed by loss frame (150/1096 [13.7%]).

Nudging is routinely employed by clinicians to guide decision-making, primarily through gain or loss framing. This retrospective analysis aids in understanding nudging in care conferences: it offers insight into potential risks and benefits of these techniques; it highlights ways in which their application has been used by caregivers; and it may be a resource for future trainee curriculum development.

This article advocates for integrating procedural justice principles into forensic mental health services to enhance patient engagement and autonomy. Procedural justice, broadly defined as fair decision-making processes, is introduced and key principles including voice, neutrality, respect and trustworthiness are described. Evidence suggestive of positive outcomes following procedural justice experiences, such as improved satisfaction, collaboration and reduced perceptions of coercion is outlined. Practical applications are suggested, including staff training and reflective practices using procedural justice principles. The article then calls for further research to explore patients' and staff members' experiences of procedural justice in forensic settings, develop measurement tools, undertake intervention studies and establish causal links between procedural justice and outcomes important for forensic patients.

In the field of healthcare delivery, shared decision making (SDM) refers to a collaborative process, wherein both patients and the healthcare professionals mutually work to make informed and consensus decisions with reference to the kind of medical care that will be administered to patients. The purpose of the current review is to explore SDM in health care, ascertain the role of medical education, and identify the ways to train and assess undergraduate medical students in competencies pertaining to SDM. An extensive search of all materials related to the topic was carried out on the PubMed and Google Scholar search engines and a total of 29 articles were selected based on their suitability with the current review objectives and analyzed. Keywords used in the search include learning resources in the title alone only (viz. shared decision making [ti] AND patient [ti]; shared decision making [ti] AND medical education [ti]; shared decision making [ti] AND assessment [ti]; shared decision making [ti] AND self-assessment [ti]; shared decision making [ti]; shared decision making [ti]). In the domain of medical education, the promotion of SDM essentially will require a multipronged approach to enable its integration into the medical curriculum. However, we must remember that mere teaching-learning methods would not improve it unless they are supplemented with assessment methods, otherwise, we will fail to deliver sustained results. In conclusion, SDM in medical education and healthcare industry represents a transformative shift from the traditional paradigm to a patient-centered approach that empowers both patients and healthcare providers, including budding medical students. The need of the hour is to advocate and encourage structured integration of SDM in the medical curriculum and support the same with periodic assessments.

Shared decision-making is a key element of person-centred care and promoted as the favoured model in preference-sensitive decision-making. Limitations to implementation have been observed, and barriers and limitations, both generally and in the palliative setting, have been highlighted. More knowledge about the process of shared decision-making in palliative cancer care would assist in addressing these limitations.

To identify and synthesise qualitative data on how people with cancer, informal carers and healthcare professionals experience and perceive shared decision-making in palliative cancer care.

A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies. We analysed data using inductive thematic analysis.

We searched five electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Scopus) from inception until June 2023, supplemented by backward searches.

We identified and included 23 studies, reported in 26 papers. Our analysis produced four analytical themes; (1) Overwhelming situation of 'no choice', (2) Processes vary depending on the timings and nature of the decisions involved, (3) Patient-physician dyad is central to decision-making, with surrounding support and (4) Level of involvement depends on interactions between individuals and systems.

Shared decision-making in palliative cancer care is a complex process of many decisions in a challenging, multifaceted and evolving situation where equipoise and choice are limited. Implications for practice: Implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice requires (1) clarifying conceptual confusion, (2) including members of the interprofessional team in the shared decision-making process and (3) adapting the approach to the ambiguous, existential situations which arise in palliative cancer care.