Shared decision-making interventions in the choice of antipsychotic prescription in people living with psychosis (SHAPE): Protocol for a realist review

Author:

Fitzgerald ItaORCID,Sahm Laura J.ORCID,Howe JoORCID,Maidment Ian,Wallace Emma,Crowley Erin K.

Abstract

Background Shared decision-making (SDM) has yet to be successfully adopted into routine use in psychiatric settings amongst people living with severe mental illnesses. Suboptimal rates of SDM are particularly prominent amongst patients with psychotic illnesses during antipsychotic treatment choices. Many interventions have been assessed for their efficacy in improving SDM within this context, although results have been variable and inconsistent. Aims To generate an in-depth understanding of how, why, for whom, and to what extent interventions facilitating the application of SDM during antipsychotic treatment choices work and the impact of contextual factors on intervention effectiveness. Methods This review will use realist review methodology to provide a causal understanding of how and why interventions work when implementing SDM during antipsychotic treatment choices. The cohort of interest will be those experiencing psychosis where ongoing treatment with an antipsychotic is clinically indicated. The review will take place over five stages; (1) Locating existing theories, (2) Searching for evidence, (3) Selecting articles, (4) Extracting and organising data and (5) Synthesizing evidence and drawing conclusions. An understanding of how and why interventions work will be achieved by developing realist programme theories on intervention effectiveness through iterative literature reviews and engaging with various stakeholder groups, including patient, clinician and carer representatives. Discussion This is the first realist review aiming to identify generative mechanisms explaining how and why successful interventions aimed at improving SDM within the parameters outlined work and in which contexts desired outcomes are most likely to be achieved. Review findings will include suggestions for clinicians, policy and decision-makers about the most promising interventions to pursue and their ideal attributes.

Publisher

Public Library of Science (PLoS)

Reference47 articles.

1. Implementing shared decision making in routine mental health care;M. Slade;World Psychiatry,2017

2. Shared decision‐making interventions for people with mental health conditions;Y Aoki;Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2022

3. NICE. Overview | Service user experience in adult mental health: improving the experience of care for people using adult NHS mental health services. 2011 [cited August 2023]. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg136

4. Trends and perspectives of shared decision-making in schizophrenia and related disorders;R Beitinger;Curr Opin Psychiatry,2014

5. NICE. Recommendations | Psychosis and schizophrenia in adults: prevention and management | Guidance. 2014 [cited March 2023]. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg178/chapter/Recommendations

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3