Do Interventions Designed to Support Shared Decision-Making Reduce Health Inequalities? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Summary

Background Increasing patient engagement in healthcare has become a health policy priority. However, there has been concern that promoting supported shared decision-making could increase health inequalities. Objective To evaluate the impact of SDM interventions on disadvantaged groups and health inequalities. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Data Sources CINAHL, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, HMIC, MEDLINE, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Open SIGLE, PsycINFO and Web of Knowledge were searched from inception until June 2012. Study Eligibility Criteria We included all studies, without language restriction, that met the following two criteria: (1) assess the effect of shared decision-making interventions on disadvantaged groups and/or health inequalities, (2) include at least 50% of people from disadvantaged groups, except if a separate analysis was conducted for this group. Results We included 19 studies and pooled 10 in a meta-analysis. The meta-analyses showed a moderate positive effect of shared decision-making interventions on disadvantaged patients. The narrative synthesis suggested that, overall, SDM interventions increased knowledge, informed choice, participation in decision-making, decision self-efficacy, preference for collaborative decision making and reduced decisional conflict among disadvantaged patients. Further, 7 out of 19 studies compared the intervention's effect between high and low literacy groups. Overall, SDM interventions seemed to benefit disadvantaged groups (e.g. lower literacy) more than those with higher literacy, education and socioeconomic status. Interventions that were tailored to disadvantaged groups' needs appeared most effective. Conclusion Results indicate that shared decision-making interventions significantly improve outcomes for disadvantaged patients. According to the narrative synthesis, SDM interventions may be more beneficial to disadvantaged groups than higher literacy/socioeconomic status patients. However, given the small sample sizes and variety in the intervention types, study design and quality, those findings should be interpreted with caution.

Related articles

• Dosage Calculations in Nursing

  This document provides a comprehensive overview of dosage calculations in nursing, emphasizing the importance of precision in medication administration using various measurement systems, and highlighting common errors and guidelines for safe practice.

• The Dynamic Nurse-Patient Relationship, Function, Process and Principles

  This document discusses Ida Jean Pelletier's Deliberative Nursing Process Theory, emphasizing the interactive nature of nursing and the essential components involved in nurse-patient interactions. It outlines how critical thinking and reflective practice enhance patient care.

• The Dynamic Nurse-Patient Relationship: Function, Process and Principles

  This document discusses the Deliberative Nursing Process Theory conceptualized by Ida Jean Pelletier, highlighting its core principles and applications in nursing care. It emphasizes the dynamic interaction between nurses and patients and the importance of critical thinking in addressing patient needs.

• The Roy Adaptation Model: A Comprehensive Nursing Framework

  The Roy Adaptation Model is a nursing framework developed by Sister Callista Roy that emphasizes the person as a holistic adaptive system interacting with a changing environment, focusing on promoting adaptation to enhance health and quality of life.

• The Life of Martha Rogers

  Martha Rogers' Theory of Unitary Human Beings provides a revolutionary framework for nursing that emphasizes understanding humans as irreducible energy fields rather than merely treating symptoms. This theory integrates concepts from quantum physics and general system theory.