Problem-based shared decision-making in diabetes care: a secondary analysis of video-recorded encounters
BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, vol. 28, pp. 157–163
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe the range of collaborative approaches to shared decision-making (SDM) observed in clinical encounters of patients with diabetes and their clinicians. DESIGN: A secondary analysis of videorecordings obtained in a randomised trial comparing usual diabetes primary care with or without using a within-encounter conversation SDM tool. SETTING: Using the purposeful SDM framework, we classified the forms of SDM observed in a random sample of 100 video-recorded clinical encounters of patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed the correlation between the extent to which each form of SDM was used and patient involvement (OPTION12-scale). RESULTS: We observed at least one instance of SDM in 86 of 100 encounters. In 31 (36%) of these 86 encounters, we found only one form of SDM, in 25 (29%) two forms, and in 30 (35%), we found ≥3 forms of SDM. In these encounters, 196 instances of SDM were identified, with weighing alternatives (n=64 of 196, 33%), negotiating conflicting desires (n=59, 30%) and problemsolving (n=70, 36%) being similarly prevalent and developing existential insight accounting for only 1% (n=3) of instances. Only the form of SDM focused on weighing alternatives was correlated with a higher OPTION12-score. More forms of SDM were used when medications were changed (2.4 SDM forms (SD 1.48) vs 1.8 (SD 1.46); p=0.050). CONCLUSIONS: After considering forms of SDM beyond weighing alternatives, SDM was present in most encounters. Clinicians and patients often used different forms of SDM within the same encounter. Recognising a range of SDM forms that clinicians and patients use to respond to problematic situations, as demonstrated in this study, opens new lines of research, education and practice that may advance patient-centred, evidence-based care.
Authors 7
-
Mayo Clinic · Leiden University Medical Center
Affiliation as printed
Department of Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Department of Medicine
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit
Leiden University Medical Center
Mayo Clinic
-
Affiliation as printed
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit
Mayo Clinic
-
Affiliation as printed
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit
Mayo Clinic
-
Affiliation as printed
Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Department of Quantitative Health Sciences
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit
Mayo Clinic
-
Mayo Clinic · Institut de Recerca Sant Pau
Affiliation as printed
Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau)
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit
Mayo Clinic
-
Leiden University Medical Center
Affiliation as printed
Department of Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
Department of Medicine
Leiden University Medical Center
-
Mayo Clinic · Leiden University Medical Center
Affiliation as printed
Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA kunneman@lumc.nl
Department of Biomedical Data Sciences
Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit
Leiden University Medical Center
Mayo Clinic
Cited by 15 stored of 15
15 results
No patents citing this paper on Lens.org (checked 2026-10-11).