To the top

Page Manager: Webmaster
Last update: 9/11/2012 3:13 PM

Tell a friend about this page
Print version

Shared Decision Making in… - University of Gothenburg, Sweden Till startsida
Sitemap
To content Read more about how we use cookies on gu.se

Shared Decision Making in Psoriasis: A Systematic Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies

Journal article
Authors M. H. Larsen
K. B. Hagen
Anne-Lene Krogstad
A. K. Wahl
Published in American Journal of Clinical Dermatology
Volume 20
Issue 1
Pages 13-29
ISSN 1175-0561
Publication year 2019
Published at Institute of Clinical Sciences
Pages 13-29
Language en
Links dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40257-018-0390-...
Subject categories Dermatology and Venereal Diseases

Abstract

Background: Patients with psoriasis face numerous treatment and self-management decisions. Shared decision making is a novel approach where patients’ preferences and values are considered in cooperation with healthcare professionals before making treatment decisions. Objective: The objective of this systematic review was to explore what is illuminated in psoriasis research regarding shared decision making, and to estimate the effects of shared decision-making interventions in this context. Methods: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies were eligible for inclusion. We searched six electronic databases up to January 2018. Two reviewers independently applied inclusion and quality criteria. The SPIDER framework was used to identify eligibility criteria for study inclusion. Narrative and thematic syntheses were utilized to identify prominent themes emerging from the data. Results: A total of 23 studies were included in the review. Of these, we included 18 studies (19 papers) to describe what was illuminated with regard to shared decision making in psoriasis research. Four major themes emerged: interpersonal communication; exchange of competence and knowledge; different world view; and involvement and preference, organized under two analytical themes; “Co-creation of decisions” and “Organization of treatment and treatment needs”. For shared decision-making effects, we included four controlled studies. These varied in scope and interventional length and showed limited use of shared decision making-specific outcome measures, reflecting the early stage of the literature. Because of study heterogeneity, a meta-synthesis was not justified. Conclusions: There appears to be a need to strengthen the relationship between medical doctors and patients with psoriasis. The evident lack of knowledge about each other’s competence and the lack of self-efficacy for both patients and providers challenges the basic principles of shared decision making. The effects of shared decision making in psoriasis are inconclusive, and more research appears necessary to determine the possible benefits of shared decision-making interventions. © 2018, Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Page Manager: Webmaster|Last update: 9/11/2012
Share:

The University of Gothenburg uses cookies to provide you with the best possible user experience. By continuing on this website, you approve of our use of cookies.  What are cookies?