ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 0374

How Do Patient Decision Aids Enable Purposeful Shared Decision-Making in Rheumatology? An Integrative Review

Ibiyemi Oke1, Ruoning Ni1 and Bharat Kumar2, 1UNVERSITY OF IOWA HOSPITALS AND CLINICS, Iowa City, IA, 2University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2024

Keywords: education, patient, Health Services Research

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Saturday, November 16, 2024

Title: Patient Outcomes, Preferences, & Attitudes Poster I

Session Type: Poster Session A

Session Time: 10:30AM-12:30PM

Background/Purpose: Shared decision-making (SDM) is a process in which patients and clinicians work together to make health care decisions.  Purposeful SDM (PSDM) is a problem-based approach that emphasizes the multifaceted nature of SDM in response to different settings and contexts.  The PSDM Framework highlights 4 modes of SDM, namely: Weighing treatment options (Mode 1), Negotiating intra- or interpersonal conflict (Mode 2), Problem-solving multiple competing demands (Mode 3), and Developing existential insight (Mode 4).  In this integrative review, we systematically identify rheumatology patient decision aids (PDA’s) described in peer-reviewed published literature, characterize which conditions they address, and assess how they support purposeful SDM.

Methods: Articles were identified through a search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO, Sciverse Scopus, EBM Reviews, PsycARTICLES, Cochrane Systemic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1948 to 2023. Additional sources were identified through contacting authors and scanning references.  The research team analyzed patient decision aids through the Purposeful SDM Framework and classified them into one of four modes.  Additionally, research team members utilized the SUNDAE Checklist (Standards for UNiversal reporting of patient Decision Aid Evaluation), a 26-item checklist to assess the quality of manuscripts evaluating the use of these PDA’s.

Results: 46 records were identifying meeting the inclusion criteria.  Among the 26 articles that contained original data regarding PDA’s, there were 23 patient decision aids.  The most common conditions represented include rheumatoid arthritis (n=8), Osteoarthritis (n=7), and lupus nephritis (n=4).  Among the 23 total PDA’s, 19 addressed weighing treatment options (Mode 1), while 2, 2, and 1 addressed ‘Negotiating intra or interpersonal conflict’ (Mode 2), “Problem-solving multiple competing demands” (Mode 3), and “Developing existential insight” (Mode 4), respectively.  The quality of publications evaluating the PDA’s varied considerably.  The median number of criteria satisfied was 21 (out of 26), with considerable variation (mean: 20.3+4.4).

Conclusion: The vast majority of rheumatology-specific PDA’s support SDM with respect to weighing treatment options (Mode 1) with very few addressing other modes of shared decision-making.  Among conditions, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, and lupus nephritis are the prime foci of PDA’s.  Manuscripts describing the development, evaluation, and delivery of PDA’s in rheumatologic conditions tend to be fairly high in quality, per the SUNDAE Checklist, but with great variability.  Altogether, our review suggests that there exist opportunities to develop and refine tools that (1) address other modes of shared decision-making beyond weighing treatment options, (2) cover a wider variety of rheumatologic conditions, and (3) more transparently report evaluation of PDA content, development, and delivery.

Supporting image 1

Out of 1503 initial records, 26 manuscripts describing the development, evaluation, and delivery of 23 patient decision aids were included for this integrative review.

Supporting image 2

The vast majority of PDA’s (79.2%) covered rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, and lupus nephritis

Supporting image 3

The quality of manuscripts describing the evaluation, development, and delivery of rheumatology-associated patient decision aids, as characterized by the SUNDAE Checklist, was high (median=21; mean=20.3) with considerable variability (standard deviation=4.4).


Disclosures: I. Oke: None; R. Ni: None; B. Kumar: None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Oke I, Ni R, Kumar B. How Do Patient Decision Aids Enable Purposeful Shared Decision-Making in Rheumatology? An Integrative Review [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2024; 76 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/how-do-patient-decision-aids-enable-purposeful-shared-decision-making-in-rheumatology-an-integrative-review/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2024

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/how-do-patient-decision-aids-enable-purposeful-shared-decision-making-in-rheumatology-an-integrative-review/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology