Cargando…
Exploration of shared decision making in oncology within the United States: a scoping review
PURPOSE: Shared decision making (SDM) among the oncology population is highly important due to complex screening and treatment decisions. SDM among patients with cancer, caregivers, and clinicians has gained more attention and importance, yet few articles have systematically examined SDM, specifical...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9803891/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36585510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07556-8 |
_version_ | 1784861984913620992 |
---|---|
author | Bennett, Rachel DeGuzman, Pamela B. LeBaron, Virginia Wilson, Daniel Jones, Randy A. |
author_facet | Bennett, Rachel DeGuzman, Pamela B. LeBaron, Virginia Wilson, Daniel Jones, Randy A. |
author_sort | Bennett, Rachel |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Shared decision making (SDM) among the oncology population is highly important due to complex screening and treatment decisions. SDM among patients with cancer, caregivers, and clinicians has gained more attention and importance, yet few articles have systematically examined SDM, specifically in the adult oncology population. This review aims to explore SDM within the oncology literature and help identify major gaps and concerns, with the goal to provide guidance in the development of clear SDM definitions and interventions. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review using the Arksey and O’Malley approach along with the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist. A systematic search was conducted in four databases that included publications since 2016. RESULTS: Of the 364 initial articles, eleven publications met the inclusion criteria. We included articles that were original research, cancer related, and focused on shared decision making. Most studies were limited in defining SDM and operationalizing a model of SDM. There were several concerns revealed related to SDM: (1) racial inequality, (2) quality and preference of the patient, caregiver, and clinician communication is important, and (3) the use of a decision-making aid or tool provides value to the patient experience. CONCLUSION: Inconsistencies regarding the meaning and operationalization of SDM and inequality of the SDM process among patients from different racial/ethnic backgrounds impact the health and quality of care patients receive. Future studies should clearly and consistently define the meaning of SDM and develop decision aids that incorporate bidirectional, interactive communication between patients, caregivers, and clinicians that account for the diversity of racial, ethnic, and sociocultural backgrounds and preferences. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07556-8. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9803891 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98038912023-01-04 Exploration of shared decision making in oncology within the United States: a scoping review Bennett, Rachel DeGuzman, Pamela B. LeBaron, Virginia Wilson, Daniel Jones, Randy A. Support Care Cancer Review PURPOSE: Shared decision making (SDM) among the oncology population is highly important due to complex screening and treatment decisions. SDM among patients with cancer, caregivers, and clinicians has gained more attention and importance, yet few articles have systematically examined SDM, specifically in the adult oncology population. This review aims to explore SDM within the oncology literature and help identify major gaps and concerns, with the goal to provide guidance in the development of clear SDM definitions and interventions. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review using the Arksey and O’Malley approach along with the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist. A systematic search was conducted in four databases that included publications since 2016. RESULTS: Of the 364 initial articles, eleven publications met the inclusion criteria. We included articles that were original research, cancer related, and focused on shared decision making. Most studies were limited in defining SDM and operationalizing a model of SDM. There were several concerns revealed related to SDM: (1) racial inequality, (2) quality and preference of the patient, caregiver, and clinician communication is important, and (3) the use of a decision-making aid or tool provides value to the patient experience. CONCLUSION: Inconsistencies regarding the meaning and operationalization of SDM and inequality of the SDM process among patients from different racial/ethnic backgrounds impact the health and quality of care patients receive. Future studies should clearly and consistently define the meaning of SDM and develop decision aids that incorporate bidirectional, interactive communication between patients, caregivers, and clinicians that account for the diversity of racial, ethnic, and sociocultural backgrounds and preferences. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-07556-8. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-12-31 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9803891/ /pubmed/36585510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07556-8 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2022, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Review Bennett, Rachel DeGuzman, Pamela B. LeBaron, Virginia Wilson, Daniel Jones, Randy A. Exploration of shared decision making in oncology within the United States: a scoping review |
title | Exploration of shared decision making in oncology within the United States: a scoping review |
title_full | Exploration of shared decision making in oncology within the United States: a scoping review |
title_fullStr | Exploration of shared decision making in oncology within the United States: a scoping review |
title_full_unstemmed | Exploration of shared decision making in oncology within the United States: a scoping review |
title_short | Exploration of shared decision making in oncology within the United States: a scoping review |
title_sort | exploration of shared decision making in oncology within the united states: a scoping review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9803891/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36585510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-022-07556-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bennettrachel explorationofshareddecisionmakinginoncologywithintheunitedstatesascopingreview AT deguzmanpamelab explorationofshareddecisionmakinginoncologywithintheunitedstatesascopingreview AT lebaronvirginia explorationofshareddecisionmakinginoncologywithintheunitedstatesascopingreview AT wilsondaniel explorationofshareddecisionmakinginoncologywithintheunitedstatesascopingreview AT jonesrandya explorationofshareddecisionmakinginoncologywithintheunitedstatesascopingreview |