Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Acad Emerg Med. 2016 Dec;23(12):1346-1353. doi: 10.1111/acem.13045.

Development and Testing of Shared Decision Making Interventions for Use in Emergency Care: A Research Agenda.

Author information

1
Department of Emergency Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
2
Department of Emergency Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.
3
Department of Emergency Medicine, Baystate Medical Center, Springfield, MA.
4
Department of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
5
School of Visual Arts, New York, NY.
6
Patient Representative, Stockbridge, GA.
7
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of California, Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA.
8
Patient and Healthcare Innovations and Center for Health Technology and Innovation, American Heart Association, Dallas, TX.
9
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
10
Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholar Program, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
11
Department of Emergency Medicine, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN.

Abstract

Decision aids are evidenced-based tools designed to increase patient understanding of medical options and possible outcomes, facilitate conversation between patients and clinicians, and improve patient engagement. Decision aids have been used for shared decision making (SDM) interventions outside of the ED setting for more than a decade. Their use in the ED has only recently begun to be studied. This article provides background on this topic and the conclusions of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference SDM in practice work group regarding "Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy-Relevant, Patient-Centered Research Agenda." The goal was to determine a prioritized research agenda for the development and testing of SDM interventions for use in emergency care that was most important to patients, clinicians, caregivers, and other key stakeholders. Using the nominal group technique, the consensus working group proposed prioritized research questions in six key domains: 1) content (i.e., clinical scenario or decision area), 2) level of evidence available, 3) tool design strategies, 4) risk communication, 5) stakeholders, and 6) outcomes.

PMID:
27457137
PMCID:
PMC5145730
DOI:
10.1111/acem.13045
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center