Decisional Conflict Scale Findings among Patients and Surrogates Making Health Decisions

Part II of an Anniversary Review

Mirjam M. Garvelink, Laura Boland, Krystal Klein, Don Vu Nguyen, Matthew Menear, Hilary L. Bekker, Karen Eden, Annie LeBlanc, Annette M. O’Connor, Dawn Stacey, France Légaré

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Background. We explored decisional conflict as measured with the 16-item Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and how it varies across clinical situations, decision types, and exposure to decision support interventions (DESIs). Methods. An exhaustive scoping review was conducted using backward citation searches and keyword searches. Eligible studies were published between 1995 and March 2015, used an original experimental/observational research design, concerned a health-related decision, and provided DCS data. Dyads independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, and extracted data. We performed narrative syntheses and calculated average or median DCS scores. Results. We included 246 articles reporting on 253 studies. DCS scores ranged from 2.4 to 89.6 out of 100. Highest baseline DCS scores were for care planning (30.5 ± 12.8, median = 30.9) and treatment decisions (30.5 ± 14.6, median = 28.0), in contexts of primary care (33.8 ± 19.8), obstetrics/gynecology (28.8 ± 10.4), and geriatrics (32.6 ± 10.7). Baseline scores were high among decision makers who were ill (29.5 ± 13.8, median = 27.2) or making decisions for themselves (29.7 ± 14.8, median = 26.9). Total DCS scores <25 out of 100 were associated with implementing decisions. Without DESIs, DCS scores tended to increase shortly after decision making (>37.4). After DESI use, DCS scores decreased short-term but increased or remained the same long-term (>6 months). Conclusions. DCS scores were highest at baseline and decreased after decision making. DESIs decreased decisional conflict immediately after decision making. The largest improvements after DESIs were in decision makers who were ill, male, or made decisions for themselves. Meta-analyses focusing on decision types, contexts, and interventions could inform hypotheses about the expected effects of DESIs, the best timing for measurement, and interpretation of DCS scores.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalMedical Decision Making
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Anniversaries and Special Events
Decision Making
Health
Conflict (Psychology)
Gynecology
Geriatrics
Obstetrics
Meta-Analysis
Primary Health Care
Research Design

Keywords

  • decisional conflict
  • Decisional Conflict Scale
  • measurement
  • scoping review
  • Shared Decision Making

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

Decisional Conflict Scale Findings among Patients and Surrogates Making Health Decisions : Part II of an Anniversary Review. / Garvelink, Mirjam M.; Boland, Laura; Klein, Krystal; Nguyen, Don Vu; Menear, Matthew; Bekker, Hilary L.; Eden, Karen; LeBlanc, Annie; O’Connor, Annette M.; Stacey, Dawn; Légaré, France.

In: Medical Decision Making, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Garvelink, MM, Boland, L, Klein, K, Nguyen, DV, Menear, M, Bekker, HL, Eden, K, LeBlanc, A, O’Connor, AM, Stacey, D & Légaré, F 2019, 'Decisional Conflict Scale Findings among Patients and Surrogates Making Health Decisions: Part II of an Anniversary Review', Medical Decision Making. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X19851346
Garvelink, Mirjam M. ; Boland, Laura ; Klein, Krystal ; Nguyen, Don Vu ; Menear, Matthew ; Bekker, Hilary L. ; Eden, Karen ; LeBlanc, Annie ; O’Connor, Annette M. ; Stacey, Dawn ; Légaré, France. / Decisional Conflict Scale Findings among Patients and Surrogates Making Health Decisions : Part II of an Anniversary Review. In: Medical Decision Making. 2019.
@article{6a9cea569b0c443388ff652f072d6fb6,
title = "Decisional Conflict Scale Findings among Patients and Surrogates Making Health Decisions: Part II of an Anniversary Review",
abstract = "Background. We explored decisional conflict as measured with the 16-item Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and how it varies across clinical situations, decision types, and exposure to decision support interventions (DESIs). Methods. An exhaustive scoping review was conducted using backward citation searches and keyword searches. Eligible studies were published between 1995 and March 2015, used an original experimental/observational research design, concerned a health-related decision, and provided DCS data. Dyads independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, and extracted data. We performed narrative syntheses and calculated average or median DCS scores. Results. We included 246 articles reporting on 253 studies. DCS scores ranged from 2.4 to 89.6 out of 100. Highest baseline DCS scores were for care planning (30.5 ± 12.8, median = 30.9) and treatment decisions (30.5 ± 14.6, median = 28.0), in contexts of primary care (33.8 ± 19.8), obstetrics/gynecology (28.8 ± 10.4), and geriatrics (32.6 ± 10.7). Baseline scores were high among decision makers who were ill (29.5 ± 13.8, median = 27.2) or making decisions for themselves (29.7 ± 14.8, median = 26.9). Total DCS scores <25 out of 100 were associated with implementing decisions. Without DESIs, DCS scores tended to increase shortly after decision making (>37.4). After DESI use, DCS scores decreased short-term but increased or remained the same long-term (>6 months). Conclusions. DCS scores were highest at baseline and decreased after decision making. DESIs decreased decisional conflict immediately after decision making. The largest improvements after DESIs were in decision makers who were ill, male, or made decisions for themselves. Meta-analyses focusing on decision types, contexts, and interventions could inform hypotheses about the expected effects of DESIs, the best timing for measurement, and interpretation of DCS scores.",
keywords = "decisional conflict, Decisional Conflict Scale, measurement, scoping review, Shared Decision Making",
author = "Garvelink, {Mirjam M.} and Laura Boland and Krystal Klein and Nguyen, {Don Vu} and Matthew Menear and Bekker, {Hilary L.} and Karen Eden and Annie LeBlanc and O’Connor, {Annette M.} and Dawn Stacey and France L{\'e}gar{\'e}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0272989X19851346",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making",
issn = "0272-989X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Decisional Conflict Scale Findings among Patients and Surrogates Making Health Decisions

T2 - Part II of an Anniversary Review

AU - Garvelink, Mirjam M.

AU - Boland, Laura

AU - Klein, Krystal

AU - Nguyen, Don Vu

AU - Menear, Matthew

AU - Bekker, Hilary L.

AU - Eden, Karen

AU - LeBlanc, Annie

AU - O’Connor, Annette M.

AU - Stacey, Dawn

AU - Légaré, France

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Background. We explored decisional conflict as measured with the 16-item Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and how it varies across clinical situations, decision types, and exposure to decision support interventions (DESIs). Methods. An exhaustive scoping review was conducted using backward citation searches and keyword searches. Eligible studies were published between 1995 and March 2015, used an original experimental/observational research design, concerned a health-related decision, and provided DCS data. Dyads independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, and extracted data. We performed narrative syntheses and calculated average or median DCS scores. Results. We included 246 articles reporting on 253 studies. DCS scores ranged from 2.4 to 89.6 out of 100. Highest baseline DCS scores were for care planning (30.5 ± 12.8, median = 30.9) and treatment decisions (30.5 ± 14.6, median = 28.0), in contexts of primary care (33.8 ± 19.8), obstetrics/gynecology (28.8 ± 10.4), and geriatrics (32.6 ± 10.7). Baseline scores were high among decision makers who were ill (29.5 ± 13.8, median = 27.2) or making decisions for themselves (29.7 ± 14.8, median = 26.9). Total DCS scores <25 out of 100 were associated with implementing decisions. Without DESIs, DCS scores tended to increase shortly after decision making (>37.4). After DESI use, DCS scores decreased short-term but increased or remained the same long-term (>6 months). Conclusions. DCS scores were highest at baseline and decreased after decision making. DESIs decreased decisional conflict immediately after decision making. The largest improvements after DESIs were in decision makers who were ill, male, or made decisions for themselves. Meta-analyses focusing on decision types, contexts, and interventions could inform hypotheses about the expected effects of DESIs, the best timing for measurement, and interpretation of DCS scores.

AB - Background. We explored decisional conflict as measured with the 16-item Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and how it varies across clinical situations, decision types, and exposure to decision support interventions (DESIs). Methods. An exhaustive scoping review was conducted using backward citation searches and keyword searches. Eligible studies were published between 1995 and March 2015, used an original experimental/observational research design, concerned a health-related decision, and provided DCS data. Dyads independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, and extracted data. We performed narrative syntheses and calculated average or median DCS scores. Results. We included 246 articles reporting on 253 studies. DCS scores ranged from 2.4 to 89.6 out of 100. Highest baseline DCS scores were for care planning (30.5 ± 12.8, median = 30.9) and treatment decisions (30.5 ± 14.6, median = 28.0), in contexts of primary care (33.8 ± 19.8), obstetrics/gynecology (28.8 ± 10.4), and geriatrics (32.6 ± 10.7). Baseline scores were high among decision makers who were ill (29.5 ± 13.8, median = 27.2) or making decisions for themselves (29.7 ± 14.8, median = 26.9). Total DCS scores <25 out of 100 were associated with implementing decisions. Without DESIs, DCS scores tended to increase shortly after decision making (>37.4). After DESI use, DCS scores decreased short-term but increased or remained the same long-term (>6 months). Conclusions. DCS scores were highest at baseline and decreased after decision making. DESIs decreased decisional conflict immediately after decision making. The largest improvements after DESIs were in decision makers who were ill, male, or made decisions for themselves. Meta-analyses focusing on decision types, contexts, and interventions could inform hypotheses about the expected effects of DESIs, the best timing for measurement, and interpretation of DCS scores.

KW - decisional conflict

KW - Decisional Conflict Scale

KW - measurement

KW - scoping review

KW - Shared Decision Making

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85066822287&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85066822287&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0272989X19851346

DO - 10.1177/0272989X19851346

M3 - Review article

JO - Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making

JF - Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making

SN - 0272-989X

ER -