Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making: A systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument

Nicolas Couët, Sophie Desroches, Hubert Robitaille, Hugues Vaillancourt, Annie Leblanc, Stéphane Turcotte, Glyn Elwyn, France Légaré

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

169 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: We have no clear overview of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in the decision-making process during consultations. The Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making instrument (OPTION) was designed to assess this. Objective: To systematically review studies that used the OPTION instrument to observe the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making across a range of clinical contexts, including different health professions and lengths of consultation. Search strategy: We conducted online literature searches in multiple databases (2001-12) and gathered further data through networking. Inclusion criteria: (i) OPTION scores as reported outcomes and (ii) health-care providers and patients as study participants. For analysis, we only included studies using the revised scale. Data extraction: Extracted data included: (i) study and participant characteristics and (ii) OPTION outcomes (scores, statistical associations and reported psychometric results). We also assessed the quality of OPTION outcomes reporting. Main results: We found 33 eligible studies, 29 of which used the revised scale. Overall, we found low levels of patient-involving behaviours: in cases where no intervention was used to implement shared decision making (SDM), the mean OPTION score was 23 ± 14 (0-100 scale). When assessed, the variables most consistently associated with higher OPTION scores were interventions to implement SDM (n = 8/9) and duration of consultations (n = 8/15). Conclusions: Whatever the clinical context, few health-care providers consistently attempt to facilitate patient involvement, and even fewer adjust care to patient preferences. However, both SDM interventions and longer consultations could improve this.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)542-561
Number of pages20
JournalHealth Expectations
Volume18
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2015

Fingerprint

Health Personnel
Decision Making
Referral and Consultation
Patient Participation
Health Occupations
Patient Preference
Psychometrics
Databases

Keywords

  • Clinician-patient communication
  • Implementation
  • OPTION instrument
  • Patient involvement
  • Shared decision making

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making : A systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument. / Couët, Nicolas; Desroches, Sophie; Robitaille, Hubert; Vaillancourt, Hugues; Leblanc, Annie; Turcotte, Stéphane; Elwyn, Glyn; Légaré, France.

In: Health Expectations, Vol. 18, No. 4, 01.08.2015, p. 542-561.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Couët, N, Desroches, S, Robitaille, H, Vaillancourt, H, Leblanc, A, Turcotte, S, Elwyn, G & Légaré, F 2015, 'Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making: A systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument', Health Expectations, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 542-561. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12054
Couët, Nicolas ; Desroches, Sophie ; Robitaille, Hubert ; Vaillancourt, Hugues ; Leblanc, Annie ; Turcotte, Stéphane ; Elwyn, Glyn ; Légaré, France. / Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making : A systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument. In: Health Expectations. 2015 ; Vol. 18, No. 4. pp. 542-561.
@article{e7e2fa9fb78641ee8b8c6148986f152d,
title = "Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making: A systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument",
abstract = "Background: We have no clear overview of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in the decision-making process during consultations. The Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making instrument (OPTION) was designed to assess this. Objective: To systematically review studies that used the OPTION instrument to observe the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making across a range of clinical contexts, including different health professions and lengths of consultation. Search strategy: We conducted online literature searches in multiple databases (2001-12) and gathered further data through networking. Inclusion criteria: (i) OPTION scores as reported outcomes and (ii) health-care providers and patients as study participants. For analysis, we only included studies using the revised scale. Data extraction: Extracted data included: (i) study and participant characteristics and (ii) OPTION outcomes (scores, statistical associations and reported psychometric results). We also assessed the quality of OPTION outcomes reporting. Main results: We found 33 eligible studies, 29 of which used the revised scale. Overall, we found low levels of patient-involving behaviours: in cases where no intervention was used to implement shared decision making (SDM), the mean OPTION score was 23 ± 14 (0-100 scale). When assessed, the variables most consistently associated with higher OPTION scores were interventions to implement SDM (n = 8/9) and duration of consultations (n = 8/15). Conclusions: Whatever the clinical context, few health-care providers consistently attempt to facilitate patient involvement, and even fewer adjust care to patient preferences. However, both SDM interventions and longer consultations could improve this.",
keywords = "Clinician-patient communication, Implementation, OPTION instrument, Patient involvement, Shared decision making",
author = "Nicolas Cou{\"e}t and Sophie Desroches and Hubert Robitaille and Hugues Vaillancourt and Annie Leblanc and St{\'e}phane Turcotte and Glyn Elwyn and France L{\'e}gar{\'e}",
year = "2015",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/hex.12054",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "542--561",
journal = "Health Expectations",
issn = "1369-6513",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making

T2 - A systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument

AU - Couët, Nicolas

AU - Desroches, Sophie

AU - Robitaille, Hubert

AU - Vaillancourt, Hugues

AU - Leblanc, Annie

AU - Turcotte, Stéphane

AU - Elwyn, Glyn

AU - Légaré, France

PY - 2015/8/1

Y1 - 2015/8/1

N2 - Background: We have no clear overview of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in the decision-making process during consultations. The Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making instrument (OPTION) was designed to assess this. Objective: To systematically review studies that used the OPTION instrument to observe the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making across a range of clinical contexts, including different health professions and lengths of consultation. Search strategy: We conducted online literature searches in multiple databases (2001-12) and gathered further data through networking. Inclusion criteria: (i) OPTION scores as reported outcomes and (ii) health-care providers and patients as study participants. For analysis, we only included studies using the revised scale. Data extraction: Extracted data included: (i) study and participant characteristics and (ii) OPTION outcomes (scores, statistical associations and reported psychometric results). We also assessed the quality of OPTION outcomes reporting. Main results: We found 33 eligible studies, 29 of which used the revised scale. Overall, we found low levels of patient-involving behaviours: in cases where no intervention was used to implement shared decision making (SDM), the mean OPTION score was 23 ± 14 (0-100 scale). When assessed, the variables most consistently associated with higher OPTION scores were interventions to implement SDM (n = 8/9) and duration of consultations (n = 8/15). Conclusions: Whatever the clinical context, few health-care providers consistently attempt to facilitate patient involvement, and even fewer adjust care to patient preferences. However, both SDM interventions and longer consultations could improve this.

AB - Background: We have no clear overview of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in the decision-making process during consultations. The Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making instrument (OPTION) was designed to assess this. Objective: To systematically review studies that used the OPTION instrument to observe the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making across a range of clinical contexts, including different health professions and lengths of consultation. Search strategy: We conducted online literature searches in multiple databases (2001-12) and gathered further data through networking. Inclusion criteria: (i) OPTION scores as reported outcomes and (ii) health-care providers and patients as study participants. For analysis, we only included studies using the revised scale. Data extraction: Extracted data included: (i) study and participant characteristics and (ii) OPTION outcomes (scores, statistical associations and reported psychometric results). We also assessed the quality of OPTION outcomes reporting. Main results: We found 33 eligible studies, 29 of which used the revised scale. Overall, we found low levels of patient-involving behaviours: in cases where no intervention was used to implement shared decision making (SDM), the mean OPTION score was 23 ± 14 (0-100 scale). When assessed, the variables most consistently associated with higher OPTION scores were interventions to implement SDM (n = 8/9) and duration of consultations (n = 8/15). Conclusions: Whatever the clinical context, few health-care providers consistently attempt to facilitate patient involvement, and even fewer adjust care to patient preferences. However, both SDM interventions and longer consultations could improve this.

KW - Clinician-patient communication

KW - Implementation

KW - OPTION instrument

KW - Patient involvement

KW - Shared decision making

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937519105&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937519105&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/hex.12054

DO - 10.1111/hex.12054

M3 - Article

C2 - 23451939

AN - SCOPUS:84937519105

VL - 18

SP - 542

EP - 561

JO - Health Expectations

JF - Health Expectations

SN - 1369-6513

IS - 4

ER -