Patient Engagement
Capturing the Patient Voice

Shared Decision-Making for Good Clinical Care: Better, but Not Easier

Article · October 12, 2017

The practice of medicine is changing. An expanding array of approaches is available to address patients’ health situations, and patients are increasingly encouraged to collaborate with their clinicians to figure out which is best for them. Patients are considered autonomous, and, in their work of being a patient, they are expected to take responsibility over their health, to be informed about their care, and to be actively involved in managing their care.

Particularly, they are expected to actively take part in the medical decision-making by preparing for clinical encounters: by reviewing booklets, videos, or decision tools, and then using this information to develop preferences to discuss with their clinicians. Clinicians, in turn, are expected to provide patients with the required information about their health and (possible) care, to apply (inter-)national and regional guidelines, and at the same time, to provide patient-centered care that fits the wishes and needs of their “client”: the patient. In this way, shared decision-making — patients and clinicians working together to figure out what is best — is like a business transaction.

It is questionable, however, whether all patients can, should, and want to be actively involved in making decisions about their care. Assuming — or imposing — patient autonomy could lead to “an underestimation of patients’ vulnerability and an overestimation of patients’ abilities to make such decisions.” Realizing that there are options, and that the outcomes of care are uncertain, can feed the fear of making the wrong decision and be enormously burdensome to patients. However, we must also stay alert for the opposite: when patients are considered vulnerable and helpless, clinicians may engage in paternalism, underestimating patients’ ability and wish to be involved in deciding what is best. Ultimately, this could lead to patients receiving care that is unnecessary, unwanted, unreasonable, or harmful.

Shared decision-making refers to more than just making decisions about care. It is a process, a conversation between the clinician and the patient, a way to craft care. The shared decision-making process can be broken down into different elements, including creating choice awareness, discussing reasonable approaches and their respective desirable and undesirable characteristics, discussing patients’ values and deliberating to form preferences about the options, and making a final decision. Shared decision-making is thus more than just offering patients information or choice and asking them to be autonomous in making decisions about their care.

Shared decision-making is not a transaction in which clinicians claim to be “patient centered” but in fact abandon our patients to uncertainty and fear. It is irrelevant who makes the final medical decision, as long as the chosen approach makes the most sense to each patient and his or her life. If patients are not able or willing to be autonomous, clinicians could make decisions about care based on whatever imperfect information they may have about each patient’s informed preferences, with the utmost respect for what the patient values in life and health.

Although there is some evidence — unfortunately much weaker than usually acknowledged — that shared decision-making can lead to improved patient outcomes, the primary goal of shared decision-making is simply to ensure that patients receive good care. It is a way to fundamentally care for this patient, not just for people like this patient. This approach to care can be difficult, both for patients and clinicians. Clinicians must be up to date on the available approaches (treatment strategies, for example) and be able to conduct clear, unhurried conversations with each patient about these approaches and what each one would mean for them in their situation.

This is not a sinecure. But who has ever claimed that clinical care should be easy? Indeed, in this way, shared decision-making is a challenging practice, one that clinicians and the systems that support their work must master on behalf of patients. Done well, it draws a stronger connection between clinicians and patients, and rewards clinicians with meaning within care routines. While not easier, shared decision-making can make care better.

 

This is a modified and translated version of this paper, first published in Dutch. This article originally appeared in NEJM Catalyst on March 22, 2017.

New Call for Submissions ­to NEJM Catalyst

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

More From Patient Engagement

Who Gives Us the Right to “Empower” Patients?

And if we are not truly empowering patients, what exactly should we be striving for?

Patients Welcome IV Self-Care; Physicians Hesitate

Parkland Hospital examines barriers to acceptance of a program that teaches uninsured patients to deliver IV antibiotics at home.

The Digital Experience Must Also Be a Human(e) Experience

The most humane experiences happen when we meet patients where they are by designing the types of touch points they want and need.

Hawaii Pacific Health Physician Checklist: Creating a Healing Experience

Transforming the Patient Experience Through the Power of Ritual

Ritual is in fact a primitive checklist: a series of steps that create safety and trust between client and caregiver.

Top Three Most Promising Trends to Capture the Patient Voice

Survey Snapshot: Many Different Channels to Hear the Patient Voice

Commentary from NEJM Catalyst Insights Council members on how to capture the patient voice and make hospital staff hear it.

Empowering Patients Empowers Providers

Why should it be surprising and novel that patient-reported outcomes have such power?

Patient-Reported Outcomes for Shared Decision-Making

Making Patients and Doctors Happier — The Potential of Patient-Reported Outcomes

PRO collection is not only feasible and good for clinical care, but it also may enhance physician satisfaction and prevent burnout.

Patient Voice Roundtable Group

Insights Roundtable Report: Measuring What Matters and Capturing the Patient Voice

From a roundtable discussion and NEJM Catalyst survey, a framework for defining the patient voice and integrating it into care delivery.

A Patient and Family Advisory Council (PFAC) for Quality

A Patient and Family Advisory Council for Quality: Making Its Voice Heard at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Though PFAC models abound, metrics on best practices are lacking. One prominent hospital may have found the answer: let those who are the experts at being patients and caregivers lead the way.

Digital Health: USC Virtual Care Clinic

Digital Technology to Engage Patients: Ensuring Access for All

To ensure that we engage the patient groups who have much to gain from the more flexible health care interactions that digital innovation can provide, we must consider issues of computer literacy, access, and trust.

Connect

A weekly email newsletter featuring the latest actionable ideas and practical innovations from NEJM Catalyst.

Learn More »

Topics

Patient-Centered Care

201 Articles

My Favorite Slide: The ICU and…

Eight aspects of care to improve ICU management from a human-centered care model.

Patient Incentives

58 Articles

Improving Patient Involvement in Care

The CEO of Virginia Mason on facilitating and enhancing patient participation in care.

Messaging System Helps Caregivers Keep Tabs…

One behavioral health provider pilots cost-effective outreach to patients with SUD that checks up on…

Insights Council

Have a voice. Join other health care leaders effecting change, shaping tomorrow.

Apply Now