When does shared decision making is adopted in psychiatric clinical practice? Results from a European multicentric study

Luciano, M.; Sampogna, G.; Del Vecchio, V.; Loos, S.; Slade, M.; Clarke, E.; Nagy, M.; Kovacs, A.; Munk-J�rgensen, P.; Krogsgaard Bording, M.; Kawohl, W.; R�ssler, W.; Puschner, B.; Fiorillo, A.

Abstract

© 2019, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature. To identify factors associated with the use of shared decision making in routine mental health care in a large multicenter European study. Data have been collected within the study “Clinical decision making and outcome in routine care for people with severe mental illness” (CEDAR), which is a naturalistic, longitudinal, observational study carried out in six European countries. Patients with a severe mental illness attending outpatient units and their treating clinicians have been recruited. Clinicians’ Clinical Decision Making (CDM) styles have been explored through the Clinical Decision Making Style Scale. Patients’ clinical and social outcomes have been assessed through validated assessment instruments. The sample consisted of 588 patients and 213 professionals. Professionals were mainly psychiatrists (35.7%), nurses (21.6%), support workers, social workers or occupational therapists (24.9%), psychologists (9.9%) or trainees in psychiatry (4.7%). In the majority of cases, clinicians adopted a shared CDM style. Shared CDM was more frequently adopted with patients with psychotic disorders, with a better quality of life and social functioning. At multivariate analyses, the likelihood of adopting shared decision making increased in patients with higher levels of interpersonal relationships’ skills (p < 0.05) and global functioning (p < 0.01). On the contrary, being a trainee in psychiatry reduced the likelihood of adopting shared CDM (p < 0.008). Shared decision making has been adopted mainly when patients have a better functioning and less severe clinical symptomatology and by less trained clinicians, differently from national and international recommendations. More efforts should be made to implement interventions to promote shared CDM, with a specific focus for trainees in psychiatry.

Citation

Luciano, M., Sampogna, G., Del Vecchio, V., Loos, S., Slade, M., Clarke, E., Nagy, M., Kovacs, A., Munk-Jørgensen, P., Krogsgaard Bording, M., Kawohl, W., Rössler, W., Puschner, B., & Fiorillo, A. (2019). When does shared decision making is adopted in psychiatric clinical practice? Results from a European multicentric study. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 64(6), 405-414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-019-01031-y

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: Jun 3, 2019
• Online Publication Date: Jun 7, 2019
• Publication Date: 2019-06
• Deposit Date: Jun 14, 2019
• Journal: European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
• Print ISSN: 0940-1334
• Electronic ISSN: 1433-8491
• Publisher: Springer Verlag
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 64
• Issue: 6
• Pages: 405-414
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-019-01031-y
• Keywords: Pharmacology (medical); Biological Psychiatry; Psychiatry and Mental health; General Medicine
• Public URL: https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/2188996
• Publisher URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00406-019-01031-y
• Additional Information: Received: 17 January 2019; Accepted: 3 June 2019; First Online: 7 June 2019; : ; : The authors declare they have no conflict of interest.; : The authors assert that all the procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant national and institutional committees on human experimentation and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, revised in 2008.