Peimani Maryam, Stewart Anita L, Garmaroudi Gholamreza, Nasli-Esfahani Ensieh
Diabetes Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinical Sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Center for Aging in Diverse Communities, Institute for Health & Aging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2025 Jan 7;25(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-12160-z.
Shared decision-making (SDM) is crucial for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management due to the complexity of treatment options. This systematic review sought to understand T2DM patients' preferences and diabetes care providers' perspectives regarding SDM, and the barriers and facilitators to SDM.
Five databases were searched from 2000 to 2023 (Medline/PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Embase). All included papers were quantitative and qualitative studies regarding preferences of patients with T2DM for SDM, perspectives of providers on SDM, and their barriers and facilitators to SDM. Quantitative findings were extracted as percentages, and qualitative findings were extracted as presented in the original research paper. Study selection was carried out independently by two authors, with discrepancies resolved by consensus and by consultation with the supervisor. The Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Qualitative Research and for Cross Sectional Studies was used to evaluate the risk of bias of included papers.
Thirty-four studies were included in this review; 22 focused on T2DM patients' decision-making preferences, 7 focused on perspectives of diabetes care providers, and 5 addressed both. Of the 27 studies of T2DM patients, 20 (ten quantitative and ten qualitative studies) reported that respondents preferred and valued SDM and wanted to make decisions in collaboration with a provider. Of the 12 studies of providers, only 5 reported that providers had positive views towards SDM and preferred to involve patients in decision-making. A comprehensive list of SDM facilitators and barriers included patient factors (facilitators like higher health literacy and motivation, and barriers like blind trust in physicians and poor health), provider factors (facilitators like a physician's information-giving behavior and medical knowledge/technical skills, and barriers like a paternalistic attitude and poor interpersonal style), and context factors (facilitators like physician accessibility and availability, and barriers like a lack of system support and low continuity).
Although SDM is important for most patients living with diabetes, the evidence from included studies suggest that providers in diabetes practice do not universally express positive views towards SDM. Because T2DM patients and their providers need to work together to implement the SDM approach satisfactorily, there is a need to encourage more providers to do so.
由于治疗方案的复杂性,共同决策(SDM)对于2型糖尿病(T2DM)的管理至关重要。本系统评价旨在了解T2DM患者对SDM的偏好以及糖尿病护理提供者对SDM的看法,以及SDM的障碍和促进因素。
检索了2000年至2023年的五个数据库(Medline/PubMed、科学网、Scopus、PsycINFO和Embase)。所有纳入的论文均为关于T2DM患者对SDM的偏好、提供者对SDM的看法及其SDM的障碍和促进因素的定量和定性研究。定量研究结果以百分比形式提取,定性研究结果按原始研究论文中的呈现方式提取。研究筛选由两位作者独立进行,如有分歧通过协商一致并咨询导师解决。使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所定性研究和横断面研究清单来评估纳入论文的偏倚风险。
本评价纳入了34项研究;22项聚焦于T2DM患者的决策偏好,7项聚焦于糖尿病护理提供者的看法,5项同时涉及两者。在27项关于T2DM患者的研究中,20项(10项定量研究和10项定性研究)报告称,受访者偏好并重视SDM,并希望与提供者合作做出决策。在12项关于提供者的研究中,只有5项报告称提供者对SDM持积极态度,并倾向于让患者参与决策。SDM促进因素和障碍的综合清单包括患者因素(促进因素如较高的健康素养和积极性,障碍如对医生的盲目信任和健康状况不佳)、提供者因素(促进因素如医生的信息提供行为和医学知识/技术技能,障碍如家长式态度和不良的人际风格)以及背景因素(促进因素如医生的可及性和可用性,障碍如缺乏系统支持和低连续性)。
尽管SDM对大多数糖尿病患者很重要,但纳入研究的证据表明,糖尿病实践中的提供者并非普遍对SDM持积极态度。由于T2DM患者及其提供者需要共同努力以令人满意地实施SDM方法,因此有必要鼓励更多提供者这样做。