Abstract
Advances in shared decision making (SDM) have not successfully translated to practice. We describe our experience and lessons
learned in translating an SDM process for primary care cardiovascular disease management. The SDM process operationalized
recognized SDM elements using workflow modifications, a computerized patient questionnaire, an automated risk calculator to
identify at-risk patients, a web-based tool for patients to choose interventions, automated feedback on the personalized benefits
of choices, and a web-based tool for providers to view patient risk, patient choice, and expert advice. Although medication
was typically the intervention resulting in the greatest risk reduction, the majority of patients preferred dietary and other
lifestyle changes. Patients generally favored the opportunity to make and communicate choices. However, providers only viewed
patient choice data in 20% of the encounters. Translation of the SDM process was successful for patients and the difference
between patient choice and optimal risk reduction points to the importance of engaging in an SDM process. Lack of engagement
by providers may be due to “alert fatigue” or to the failure of the SDM process to improve efficiency in the office visit.
learned in translating an SDM process for primary care cardiovascular disease management. The SDM process operationalized
recognized SDM elements using workflow modifications, a computerized patient questionnaire, an automated risk calculator to
identify at-risk patients, a web-based tool for patients to choose interventions, automated feedback on the personalized benefits
of choices, and a web-based tool for providers to view patient risk, patient choice, and expert advice. Although medication
was typically the intervention resulting in the greatest risk reduction, the majority of patients preferred dietary and other
lifestyle changes. Patients generally favored the opportunity to make and communicate choices. However, providers only viewed
patient choice data in 20% of the encounters. Translation of the SDM process was successful for patients and the difference
between patient choice and optimal risk reduction points to the importance of engaging in an SDM process. Lack of engagement
by providers may be due to “alert fatigue” or to the failure of the SDM process to improve efficiency in the office visit.
- Content Type Journal Article
- Pages 1-11
- DOI 10.1007/s13142-011-0023-5
- Authors
- J B Jones, Center for Health Research, Geisinger Clinic, Danville, PA USA
- Christa A Bruce, Center for Health Research, Geisinger Clinic, Danville, PA USA
- Nirav R Shah, Center for Health Research, Geisinger Clinic, Danville, PA USA
- William F Taylor, Geisinger Clinic, Danville, PA USA
- Walter F Stewart, Center for Health Research, Geisinger Clinic, Danville, PA USA
- Journal Translational Behavioral Medicine
- Online ISSN 1613-9860
- Print ISSN 1869-6716