72identifies a number of critical components <strong>in</strong> the community and <strong>in</strong> the healthcare system that support and promote that shared decisional process. These <strong>in</strong>cludeself-management, decision support, cl<strong>in</strong>ical <strong>in</strong>formation systems, and deliverysystem design.Figure 1California’ s Behavioral <strong>Health</strong> <strong>Care</strong> ModelResourcesand PoliciesCommunitySocialInclusionandOpportunityIOM Aims and RulesSelf-ManagementSupport<strong>Mental</strong> <strong>Health</strong> System<strong>Health</strong> <strong>Care</strong> OrganizationDeliverySystemDesignURAC standards<strong>Decision</strong>SupportCl<strong>in</strong>icalInformationSystemsEmpoweredHopefulConsumerProductiveInteractionsReceptiveCapableTeamRecovery/Wellness OutcomesUnpack<strong>in</strong>g <strong>Shared</strong> <strong>Decision</strong> Barriers to Identify SolutionsProviders and ConsumersThe primary approach to chang<strong>in</strong>g providers’ and consumers’ behaviors focuseson the decision support element of the framework. Cl<strong>in</strong>ical <strong>in</strong>formation systemsare also critical <strong>in</strong> deliver<strong>in</strong>g decision support <strong>in</strong> forms and at times that serve tofacilitate productive <strong>in</strong>teractions. We <strong>in</strong>clude <strong>in</strong>formation tools <strong>in</strong> our def<strong>in</strong>ition ofdecision support, as well as tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> communication skills to teach providers andconsumers how to exchange <strong>in</strong>formation, use the <strong>in</strong>formation tools, and negotiate atreatment plan.Patient-centered care, <strong>in</strong> the context of cl<strong>in</strong>ician tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g, has largely focused on<strong>in</strong>terview<strong>in</strong>g skills (Lew<strong>in</strong>, Skea, Entwistle, Zwarenste<strong>in</strong>, & Dick, 2001). Rigorousresearch studies have shown that doctors, nurses, and pharmacists can learn newskills of agenda sett<strong>in</strong>g, reflective listen<strong>in</strong>g, present<strong>in</strong>g pros and cons of treatment,and collaborative decision-mak<strong>in</strong>g and plann<strong>in</strong>g. When health professionals adopt<strong>Shared</strong> <strong>Decision</strong>-<strong>Mak<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Mental</strong> <strong>Health</strong> <strong>Care</strong>:Practice, Research, and Future Directions
73these approaches, people are more satisfied with their care, and more likely to followthrough with therapy (Stevenson, Cox, Britten, & Dundar, 2004; Edwards et al.,2004; Fellowes, Wilk<strong>in</strong>son, & Moore, 2004). Some studies show improved healthstatus and lowered anxiety (van Dam, van Der, van Den, Ryckman, & Crebolder,2003). A Cochrane Collaboration review (Lew<strong>in</strong> et al., 2001) <strong>in</strong>dicates that physicians<strong>in</strong> structured tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g programs learn communication skills quickly and reta<strong>in</strong>them, especially when offered the opportunity for practice with observationalevaluation and feedback. Other systematic reviews show similar results (Coulter &Ell<strong>in</strong>s, 2006).However, the results of both <strong>in</strong>patient and outpatient surveys show that one-thirdto one-half of patients <strong>in</strong>dicate they would have liked more <strong>in</strong>volvement <strong>in</strong> decisionsabout their treatment and care (Coulter, 2006). This apparent gap between expectationsand experience is beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g to be <strong>in</strong>vestigated. Cl<strong>in</strong>ician barriers to fullyembrac<strong>in</strong>g the collaborative approach <strong>in</strong>clude both role concerns and skill concerns.Physicians’ and nurses’ perceived barriers to provid<strong>in</strong>g evidence-based <strong>in</strong>formationto patients and <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g them <strong>in</strong> decisions, as identified by Ford, Schofield, andHope (2002), <strong>in</strong>clude:• Concern about knowledge gaps and limitations of the research evidence;• Concern about their own lack of skills <strong>in</strong> risk communication;• Belief that many patients could not cope with the <strong>in</strong>formation and/or wouldnot want to take responsibility for decision-mak<strong>in</strong>g;• Fear that patients would tend to choose the most expensive or unaffordableoptions;• Concern about lack of technical support for shared decision-mak<strong>in</strong>g, e.g., nonavailabilityof risk communication tools or decision aids;• Concern about time constra<strong>in</strong>ts with<strong>in</strong> the consultation; and• Concern about disrupt<strong>in</strong>g or underm<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the doctor-patient relationship(p. 181).To overcome resistance by physicians and other providers, exam<strong>in</strong>ation and licensurerequirements have become a leverage po<strong>in</strong>t to require providers to learn communicationskills. Pass<strong>in</strong>g competency exam<strong>in</strong>ations <strong>in</strong> communication skills is nowpart of step three of the exam<strong>in</strong>ation of the National Board of Medical Exam<strong>in</strong>ers.The American Board of Internal Medic<strong>in</strong>e requires demonstration of competency <strong>in</strong>communication skills, and other members of the American Board of Medical Specialistsare <strong>in</strong> the process of add<strong>in</strong>g communication as a basic skill <strong>in</strong> their specialty.However, even <strong>in</strong> countries that have widely adopted this approach, thereare cont<strong>in</strong>u<strong>in</strong>g concerns expressed by providers. A recent study of cl<strong>in</strong>icians <strong>in</strong> the<strong>Shared</strong> <strong>Decision</strong>-<strong>Mak<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Mental</strong> <strong>Health</strong> <strong>Care</strong>: Practice, Research, and Future Directions
- Page 4:
iiContentsIntroduction ............
- Page 11 and 12:
5outpatient commitment (Holmes-Rovn
- Page 13 and 14:
7Advantages• Practitioners can be
- Page 15:
9Section 2The Practice of SharedDec
- Page 22 and 23:
16Section 3SDM ResearchCurrent rese
- Page 24:
18Mental health care providers are
- Page 27 and 28: 21want mental health treatment or d
- Page 29: 23Some participants raised concerns
- Page 37 and 38: 31Section 6ConclusionsShared decisi
- Page 39 and 40: 33Fellowes, D., Wilkinson, S., & Mo
- Page 41 and 42: 35Power, A. Kathryn. (July 10, 2007
- Page 43 and 44: 37Appendix AResourcesThis list is p
- Page 45 and 46: 39Appendix BShared Decision-MakingM
- Page 47 and 48: 41Annelle Primm, M.D., M.P.H.Direct
- Page 49 and 50: 43Supplement 1Shared Decision-Makin
- Page 51 and 52: 45IntroductionThe consumer-driven r
- Page 53 and 54: 47Background: Definitions of SDM an
- Page 55 and 56: 49• Freedom to live in the commun
- Page 57 and 58: 51providers only (Wills & Homes-Rov
- Page 59: 53SDM for Schizophrenia TreatmentBu
- Page 63 and 64: 57I interact with my consumers; I f
- Page 65 and 66: 59ReferencesAdams, J. R., & Drake,
- Page 67 and 68: 61Elwyn, G., Edwards, A., Kinnersle
- Page 69 and 70: 63Murray, E., Pollack, L., White, M
- Page 71 and 72: 65Thistlethwaite, J., Evans, R., Ti
- Page 73 and 74: 67AbstractShared decision-making is
- Page 75 and 76: 69Confronting Critical Challenges:
- Page 77: 71into treatment should still be in
- Page 81 and 82: 75consumers to engage with their pr
- Page 83 and 84: 77that were produced in the U.S., w
- Page 85 and 86: 79a healing partnership and develop
- Page 87 and 88: 81Shared Decision-Making in Mental
- Page 89 and 90: 83However, peer support requires st
- Page 91 and 92: 85ConclusionsImplementation of SDM
- Page 93 and 94: 87Fellowes, D., Wilkinson, S., & Mo
- Page 95 and 96: 89President’s Commission for the
- Page 97 and 98: 91Supplement 3Aids to Assist Shared
- Page 99 and 100: 93IntroductionSignificance of Share
- Page 101 and 102: 95In recent years, a variety of tec
- Page 103 and 104: 97• Provide balanced information,
- Page 105 and 106: 99Form of Access or AdministrationC
- Page 107 and 108: 101ences). Some of these Web-based
- Page 109 and 110: 103video about shared decision-maki
- Page 111 and 112: 105clarify one’s own values and p
- Page 113 and 114: 107potential results, than on quant
- Page 115 and 116: 109Once again, however, it is worth
- Page 117 and 118: 111who belong to minority groups or
- Page 119 and 120: 113Hamann, J., Langer, B., Winkler,
- Page 122: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN