Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Satisfaction of patients and primary care physicians with shared decision making


Hirsch, O; Keller, H; Albohn-Kühne, C; Krones, T; Donner-Banzhoff, N (2010). Satisfaction of patients and primary care physicians with shared decision making. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 33(3):321-342.

Abstract

Satisfaction with treatment is regarded as an important outcome measure, but its suitability has not been thoroughly investigated in the context of shared decision making (SDM). The authors evaluated whether both patients' and physicians' satisfaction ratings differ between an intervention group and a control group within a structured tool for cardiovascular prevention (ARRIBA-Herz). In a pragmatic, cluster-randomized, controlled trial, 44 family physicians in the intervention group consecutively recruited 550 patients whereas 47 physicians in the control group included 582 patients. Main findings were high satisfaction ratings independent of group allocation in patients and physicians. Significant differences had only negligible effect sizes. Compared to global satisfaction ratings, the effects of the shared decision-making process are better measured by a more concrete approach representing different steps of this process. Further research should refine behaviorally oriented questionnaires that measure SDM and a version for physicians should also be created.

Abstract

Satisfaction with treatment is regarded as an important outcome measure, but its suitability has not been thoroughly investigated in the context of shared decision making (SDM). The authors evaluated whether both patients' and physicians' satisfaction ratings differ between an intervention group and a control group within a structured tool for cardiovascular prevention (ARRIBA-Herz). In a pragmatic, cluster-randomized, controlled trial, 44 family physicians in the intervention group consecutively recruited 550 patients whereas 47 physicians in the control group included 582 patients. Main findings were high satisfaction ratings independent of group allocation in patients and physicians. Significant differences had only negligible effect sizes. Compared to global satisfaction ratings, the effects of the shared decision-making process are better measured by a more concrete approach representing different steps of this process. Further research should refine behaviorally oriented questionnaires that measure SDM and a version for physicians should also be created.

Statistics

Citations

9 citations in Web of Science®
10 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

3 downloads since deposited on 30 Jan 2011
0 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:01 Faculty of Theology > Center for Ethics
04 Faculty of Medicine > Institute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine
Dewey Decimal Classification:170 Ethics
610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2010
Deposited On:30 Jan 2011 17:56
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 14:37
Publisher:Sage Publications
ISSN:0163-2787
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278710376662
Related URLs:http://ehp.sagepub.com/content/33/3.toc (Publisher)
PubMed ID:20801975

Download

Preview Icon on Download
Filetype: PDF (Verlags-PDF) - Registered users only
Size: 1MB
View at publisher