Editorial by Richards and Coulter
Shared decision making, in which patients and health professionals join in both the process of decision making and ownership of the decision made, is attracting considerable interest as a means by which patients' preferences can be incorporated into clinical decisions.1 When there are several treatment options which may have different effects on the patient's quality of life, there is a strong case for offering patients choice. Their active involvement in decision making may increase the effectiveness of the treatment.
Trials are currently under way to test this hypothesis formally, but there are good grounds for optimism. Patients with hypertension benefit if they are allowed to adopt an active rather than a passive role in treatment, 2 3 patients with breast cancer suffer less depression and anxiety if they are treated by doctors who adopt a participative consultation style,4 and patients who are more actively involved in discussions about the management of their diabetes achieve better blood sugar control.5 Patients whose doctors are ignorant of their values and preferences may receive treatment that is inappropriate to their needs.6–8
Patients cannot express informed preferences unless they are given sufficient and appropriate information, including detailed explanations about their condition and the likely outcomes with and without treatment. Yet many report considerable difficulties in obtaining relevant information.9 There are various reasons for this. Health professionals frequently underestimate patients' desire for and ability to cope with information. Consultation times are limited—there is often insufficient time to explain fully the condition and the treatment choices. Health professionals may themselves lack knowledge of treatment options and their effects. A solution to this problem is to ensure that patients have access to written or audiovisual material, to inform themselves and to use in discussion with health …
[1]
M Baum,et al.
Psychological outcomes of different treatment policies in women with early breast cancer outside a clinical trial.
,
1990,
BMJ.
[2]
V. Entwistle,et al.
Developing Information Materials to Present the Findings of Technology Assessments to Consumers: The Experience of the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination
,
1998,
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.
[3]
J. Evans,et al.
Patients' choices and perceptions after an invitation to participate in treatment decisions.
,
1992,
Social science & medicine.
[4]
S. Kaplan,et al.
Assessing the Effects of Physician-Patient Interactions on the Outcomes of Chronic Disease
,
1989,
Medical care.
[5]
Martin Tattersall,et al.
Informing Patients: An Assessment of the Quality of Patient Information Materials
,
1999,
BMJ.
[6]
A. Coulter,et al.
Patients' preferences and general practitioners' decisions in the treatment of menstrual disorders.
,
1994,
Family practice.
[7]
J. Cockburn,et al.
Prescribing behaviour in clinical practice: patients' expectations and doctors' perceptions of patients' expectations—a questionnaire study
,
1997,
BMJ.
[8]
A Coulter,et al.
Partnerships with Patients: The Pros and Cons of Shared Clinical Decision-Making
,
1997,
Journal of health services research & policy.
[9]
B A Schulman,et al.
Active Patient Orientation and Outcomes in Hypertensive Treatment: Application of a Socio-Organizational Perspective
,
1979,
Medical care.
[10]
B. Lo,et al.
Do patients want to participate in medical decision making?
,
1984,
JAMA.