Measuring client’s experiences of shared decision making in psychiatric services
2015 (English)In: Closing the gap between research and policy in mental health: Book of abstracts / [ed] Fase20 S.L., Málaga: ENMESH , 2015, 117-118 p.Conference paper, Abstract (Refereed)
Introduction: While increased democratization and user participation are strongly emphasized political and ideological goals within the entire healthcare sector, research-based knowledge about how to achieve these goals is limited, not least in the psychiatric field. Shared decision-making, SDM, is an internationally described method which seeks to increase users’ involvement in health care decisions. However, knowledge of SDM as a method is limited, and research has focused primarily on SDM in medical decisions in somatic care. Despite the potential impact of SDM on users satisfaction with care and the quality in health care decisions, there is a lack of competence and skills in how to work with SDM among health care providers. Validated measures of SDM can play a critical role in supporting healthcare providers to increase their knowledge and skills in order to promote patient participation in healthcare.
Aims: This project intends to increase knowledge regarding how SDM can be effectively evaluated in psychiatric services in Sweden.
Methods: The present study has a methodological design where the translated version of the instruments Dyadic option, SURE and CollaboRATE were psychometrically investigated. It was carried out in 2014 at 19 municipal social psychiatry units in Sweden. The study sample consisted of 105 clients in contact with these services and the criteria for inclusion were that the clients were over 18 years of age and had experience of a decision having been taken.
Results: A Swedish version of Dyadic option, SURE and CollaboRATE are acceptable in terms of face and content validity, internal consistency and stability. The concurrent validity of Dyadic option was demonstrated with positive correlations with SURE and CollaboRATE. However, there was no correlation between SURE and CollaboRATE.
Conclusions: In the presentation, the findings of the evaluation of the SDM process in psychiatric care will be discussed. Furthermore, we will also discuss how the use of instruments that measure SDM in psychiatric health care can provide a tool for contributing to a structured person-centered dialogue between clients and staff, as well as how evaluations of SDM can contribute to the quality of the decision and ensure informed consent.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Málaga: ENMESH , 2015. 117-118 p.
Shared decision making, psychiatry
Health Sciences Nursing
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-33661ISBN: 978-84-608-2781-8 (electronic)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hh-33661DiVA: diva2:1086721
ENMESH - Eleventh International Conference of the European Network For Mental Health Service Evaluation, Málaga, Spain, 1-3 October, 2015