38
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A three-talk model for shared decision making: multistage consultation process

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives To revise an existing three-talk model for learning how to achieve shared decision making, and to consult with relevant stakeholders to update and obtain wider engagement.

          Design Multistage consultation process.

          Setting Key informant group, communities of interest, and survey of clinical specialties.

          Participants 19 key informants, 153 member responses from multiple communities of interest, and 316 responses to an online survey from medically qualified clinicians from six specialties.

          Results After extended consultation over three iterations, we revised the three-talk model by making changes to one talk category, adding the need to elicit patient goals, providing a clear set of tasks for each talk category, and adding suggested scripts to illustrate each step. A new three-talk model of shared decision making is proposed, based on “team talk,” “option talk,” and “decision talk,” to depict a process of collaboration and deliberation. Team talk places emphasis on the need to provide support to patients when they are made aware of choices, and to elicit their goals as a means of guiding decision making processes. Option talk refers to the task of comparing alternatives, using risk communication principles. Decision talk refers to the task of arriving at decisions that reflect the informed preferences of patients, guided by the experience and expertise of health professionals.

          Conclusions The revised three-talk model of shared decision making depicts conversational steps, initiated by providing support when introducing options, followed by strategies to compare and discuss trade-offs, before deliberation based on informed preferences.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          An integrative model of shared decision making in medical encounters.

          Given the fluidity with which the term shared decision making (SDM) is used in teaching, assessment and research, we conducted a focused and systematic review of articles that specifically address SDM to determine the range of conceptual definitions. In April 2005, we ran a Pubmed (Medline) search to identify articles published through 31 December 2003 with the words shared decision making in the title or abstract. The search yielded 681 citations, 342 of which were about SDM in the context of physician-patient encounters and published in English. We read and reviewed the full text of all 342 articles, and got any non-redundant references to SDM, which yielded an additional 76 articles. Of the 418 articles examined, 161 (38.5%) had a conceptual definition of SDM. We identified 31 separate concepts used to explicate SDM, but only "patient values/preferences" (67.1%) and "options" (50.9%) appeared in more than half the 161 definitions. Relatively few articles explicitly recognized and integrated previous work. Our review reveals that there is no shared definition of SDM. We propose a definition that integrates the extant literature base and outlines essential elements that must be present for patients and providers to engage in the process of SDM. The integrative definition of SDM is intended to provide a useful foundation for describing and operationalizing SDM in further research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Goal-oriented patient care--an alternative health outcomes paradigm.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found
              Is Open Access

              Twelve myths about shared decision making.

              As shared decision makes increasing headway in healthcare policy, it is under more scrutiny. We sought to identify and dispel the most prevalent myths about shared decision making.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: professor
                Role: assistant professor
                Role: research assistant
                Role: research clinician
                Role: assistant professor
                Role: associate professor
                Role: associate professor
                Role: chief care delivery evaluation officer
                Role: professor of discourse and cultural studies
                Role: professor
                Role: director
                Role: professor
                Role: professor
                Role: research fellow
                Role: assistant professor
                Role: senior researcher
                Role: Harkness fellow
                Role: associate professor
                Role: professor
                Role: associate professor
                Role: professor
                Journal
                BMJ
                BMJ
                bmj
                The BMJ
                BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
                0959-8138
                1756-1833
                2017
                06 November 2017
                : 359
                : j4891
                Affiliations
                [1 ]The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Williamson Translational Research Building, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA
                [2 ]Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands
                [3 ]Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
                [4 ]Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, USA
                [5 ]Faculty of Arts, University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, UK
                [6 ]Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, HØKH Research Centre, Akershus University Hospital Sykehusveien 25, Lørenskog, Norway
                [7 ]Center for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Maine Medical Center, Portland, Maine, USA
                [8 ]University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Department of Medical Psychology, Hamburg, Germany
                [9 ]Centre for Medical Education, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
                [10 ]Centre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical & Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
                [11 ]Evaluation Unit, Canary Islands Health Service, Camino Candelaria, El Rosario, Tenerife, Spain
                [12 ]Department of Occupational therapy, Tokyo University of Technology, Nishikamata, Ohtaku, Tokyo, Japan
                [13 ]Discipline of General Practice, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, NSW, Australia
                [14 ]Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada
                [15 ]Department of Family Medicine, School CAPHRI, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: G Elwyn glynelwyn@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                elwg040377
                10.1136/bmj.j4891
                5683042
                29109079
                86c902cf-4b8d-462a-a6aa-9797f9f85f47
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 18 October 2017
                Categories
                Research

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article