How can clinical practice guidelines be adapted to facilitate shared decision making? A qualitative key-informant study

BMJ Quality and Safety

Volumn 22, Issue 10, 2013, Pages 855-863

  Van Der Weijden, Trudy ^a   Pieterse, Arwen H ^b   Koelewijn Van Loon, Marije S ^a   Knaapen, Loes ^c   Légaré, France ^d   Boivin, Antoine ^e   Burgers, Jako S ^f   Stiggelbout, Anne M ^b   Faber, Marjan ^g   Elwyn, Glyn ^g,h  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITÉ DE SHERBROOKE   (Canada)

^f DUTCH COLLEGE OF GENERAL PRACTITIONERS   (Netherlands)

^g RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^h CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; DECISION MAKING; DEPRESSION; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH LITERACY; HEALTH PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; MALE; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PATIENT REFERRAL; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUALITY OF LIFE; RISK FACTOR; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; WATCHFUL WAITING;

CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; SHARED DECISION MAKING;

DECISION MAKING; DEVELOPED COUNTRIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH;

EID: 84884666892     PISSN: 20445415     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001502     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, et al. Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice. J Gen Intern Med 2012;27:1361-7.
2. Légaré F, Witteman H. Shared decision making: examining key elements and barriers to adoption into routine clinical practice. Health Aff 2013;32:276-84.
3. Seminar. Salzburg statement on shared decision making. BMJ 2011;342:d1745.
4. Elwyn G, Légaré F, van der Weijden T, et al. Arduous implementation: does the normalisation process model explain why it's so difficult to embed decision support technologies for patients in routine clinical practice. Implement Sci 2008;3:57.
5. Légaré F, Ratte S, Gravel K, et al. Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision making in clinical practice: update of a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions. Patient Educ Couns 2008;73:526-35.
6. Légaré F, Ratte S, Stacey D, et al. Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;5:CD006732.
7. Knaapen LCH, Cambrosio A, Castel P, et al. Pragmatic evidence and textual arrangements: a case study of French clinical cancer guidelines. Soc Sci Med 2010;71:685-92.
8. Matlock D, Nowels C, Masoudi F, et al. Patient and cardiologist perceptions on decision making for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: a qualitative study. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2011;34:1634-44.
9. Timmermans S, Berg M. The gold standard: a challenge of evidence-based medicine and standardization in health care. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2003.
10. O'Connor A. Using decision aids to help patients navigate the 'grey zone' of medical decision making. CMAJ 2007;176:1597-8.
11. Guyatt G, Oxman A, Kunz R, et al. Going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ 2008;336:1049-51.
12. Légaré F, Boivin A, van derWeijden T, et al. Patient and public involvement in clinical practice guidelines: a knowledge synthesis of existing programs. Med Decis Mak 2011;31:E45-74.
13. Schünemann H, Fretheim A, Oxman A. Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 10. Integrating values and consumer involvement. Health Res Policy Syst 2006;4:22.
14. Eddy D. Clinical decision making: from theory to practice. Rationing by patient choice. JAMA 1991;265:105-8.
15. van der Weijden T, Boivin A, Burgers J, et al. Clinical practice guidelines and patient decision aids. An inevitable relationship. J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65:584-9.
16. Chong C, Chen I, Naglie G, et al. Do clinical practice guidelines incorporate evidence on patient preferences? Med Dec Mak 2007;27:E63-4.
17. Krahn M Naglie G. The next step in guideline development: incorporating patient preferences. JAMA 2008;300:436-8.
18. McCormack J, Loewen P. Adding 'value' to clinical practice guidelines. Can Fam Physician 2007;53:1326-7.
19. Shaneyfelt T, Centor R. Reassessment of clinical practice guidelines: go gently into that good night. JAMA 2009;301:868-9.
20. van der Weijden T, Légaré F, Boivin A, et al. How to integrate individual patient values and preferences in clinical practice guidelines? A research protocol. Implement Sci 2010;5:10.
21. Elo S, Kyngas H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs 2008;62:107-15.
22. Pieterse A, de Vries M, Kunneman M, et al. Theory-informed design of values clarification methods: a cognitive psychological perspective on patient health-related decision making. Soc Sci Med 2013;77:156-63.
23. Guba E, Lincoln Y. Naturalistic inquiry. NewburyPark: Sage, 1985.
24. Stiggelbout A, Van der Weijden T, De Wit M, et al. Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare. BMJ 2012;344:e256.
25. Dawson J, Doll H, Fitzpatrick R, et al. The routine use of patient reported outcome measures in healthcare settings. BMJ 2010;340:c186.