Engaging Emergency Department Patients in the Creation of a Shared Decision-­Making Tool Regarding CT Scanning in Kidney Stones: Challenges to Traditional Stakeholder Engagement

Background: Every year approximately 2 million patients are seen in US EDs for suspected renal colic, and the majority receive CT scans. The objective of our study was to develop a stakeholder-informed conversation aid to help clinicians use SDM regarding CT scanning in patients with suspected renal colic. Methods: Using a published decision aid development framework, and under the direction of a multi-disciplinary Steering Committee, we engaged a diverse set of stakeholders via qualitative methods. EM clinicians, urologists, radiologists, researchers, and emergency department patients participated in focus groups and semi-structured interviews. All groups were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed in an iterative process by a four-person coding team. Emergent themes were identified and used to develop a decision aid which was iteratively refined. Results: A total of 8 interviews and 7 focus groups were conducted with 36 stakeholders (including local ED patients) The following three themes emerged: 1. Patient participants reported a desire to be involved in this decision and wanted more information regarding risks and benefits of CT scans. 2. Clinicians were comfortable diagnosing kidney stones without a CT scan, however, some felt that clinical uncertainty was a barrier to SDM. 3. All stakeholders identified strategies to facilitate this conversation such as check-lists and visual aids. Conclusion: Using stakeholder input, we developed a communication tool to facilitate an SDM conversation around the use of CT in suspected renal colic. Further testing will assess whether this tool can safely improve patient engagement and decrease low yield CT usage

Correction to: Cluster identification, selection, and description in Cluster randomized crossover trials: the PREP-IT trials

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article

Figure 1

<div><p>Developing the Statin Choice Decision Aid</p> <p>The design process used to develop our decision aid involved user-centered observation and synthesis and an iterative development process. This process tested versions of the decision aid that incorporated insights from the research evidence, our observations, and user feedback [<a href="http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040233#pmed-0040233-b026" target="_blank">26</a>].</p></div

Shared Decisionmaking in the Emergency Department: A Guiding Framework for Clinicians

Shared decisionmaking has been proposed as a method to promote active engagement of patients in emergency care decisions. Despite the recent attention shared decisionmaking has received in the emergency medicine community, including being the topic of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference, misconceptions remain in regard to the precise meaning of the term, the process, and the conditions under which it is most likely to be valuable. With the help of a patient representative and an interaction designer, we developed a simple framework to illustrate how shared decisionmaking should be approached in clinical practice. We believe it should be the preferred or default approach to decisionmaking, except in clinical situations in which 3 factors interfere. These 3 factors are lack of clinical uncertainty or equipoise, patient decisionmaking ability, and time, all of which can render shared decisionmaking infeasible. Clinical equipoise refers to scenarios in which there are 2 or more medically reasonable management options. Patient decisionmaking ability refers to a patient's capacity and willingness to participate in his or her emergency care decisions. Time refers to the acuity of the clinical situation (which may require immediate action) and the time that the clinician has to devote to the shared decisionmaking conversation. In scenarios in which there is only one medically reasonable management option, informed consent is indicated, with compassionate persuasion used as appropriate. If time or patient capacity is lacking, physician-directed decisionmaking will occur. With this framework as the foundation, we discuss the&nbsp;process of shared decisionmaking and how it can be used in practice. Finally, we highlight 5 common misconceptions in regard to shared decisionmaking in the ED. With an improved understanding of shared decisionmaking, this approach should be used to facilitate the provision of high-quality, patient-centered emergency care

Development and Testing of Shared Decision Making Interventions for Use in Emergency Care: A Research Agenda

Decision aids are evidenced-based tools designed to increase patient understanding of medical options and possible outcomes, facilitate conversation between patients and clinicians, and improve patient engagement. Decision aids have been used for shared decision making (SDM) interventions outside of the ED setting for more than a decade. Their use in the ED has only recently begun to be studied. This article provides background on this topic and the conclusions of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference SDM in practice work group regarding "Shared Decision Making in the Emergency Department: Development of a Policy-Relevant, Patient-Centered Research Agenda." The goal was to determine a prioritized research agenda for the development and testing of SDM interventions for use in emergency care that was most important to patients, clinicians, caregivers, and other key stakeholders. Using the nominal group technique, the consensus working group proposed prioritized research questions in six key domains: 1) content (i.e., clinical scenario or decision area), 2) level of evidence available, 3) tool design strategies, 4) risk communication, 5) stakeholders, and 6) outcomes