Fowler Floyd J, Sepucha Karen R, Stringfellow Vickie, Valentine K D
Center for Survey Research, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, USA.
Harvard University School of Medicine, Cambridge, MA, USA.
J Patient Exp. 2021 Nov 26;8:23743735211060811. doi: 10.1177/23743735211060811. eCollection 2021.
The Shared Decision-Making (SDM) Process scale (scored 0-4) uses 4 questions about decision-making behaviors: discussion of options, pros, cons, and preferences. We use data from mail surveys of patients who made surgical decisions at 9 clinical sites and a national web survey to assess the reliability and validity of the measure to assess shared decision-making at clinical sites. Patients at sites using decision aids to promote shared decision-making for hip, knee, back, or breast cancer surgery had significantly higher scores than national cross-section samples of surgical patients for 3 of 4 comparisons and significantly higher scores for both comparisons with "usual care sites." Reliability was supported by an intra-class correlation at the clinical site level of 0.93 and an average correlation of SDM scores for knee and hip surgery patients treated at the same sites of 0.56. The results document the reliability and validity of the measure to assess the degree of shared decision-making for surgical decisions at clinical sites.
共享决策(SDM)过程量表(评分0 - 4)使用4个关于决策行为的问题:讨论选择、优点、缺点和偏好。我们使用来自9个临床地点进行手术决策的患者的邮件调查数据以及一项全国性网络调查,来评估该量表在临床地点评估共享决策的可靠性和有效性。在使用决策辅助工具促进髋关节、膝关节、背部或乳腺癌手术共享决策的地点,患者在4项比较中的3项得分显著高于手术患者的全国横断面样本,并且在与“常规护理地点”的两项比较中得分均显著更高。临床地点水平的组内相关性为0.93,以及在同一地点接受治疗的膝关节和髋关节手术患者的SDM得分平均相关性为0.56,支持了该量表的可靠性。结果证明了该量表在临床地点评估手术决策共享决策程度的可靠性和有效性。