Shared Decision Making in the Psychiatric Inpatient Setting: An Ethnographic Study about Interprofessional Psychiatric Consultations
- PMID: 35329331
- PMCID: PMC8954628
- DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19063644
Shared Decision Making in the Psychiatric Inpatient Setting: An Ethnographic Study about Interprofessional Psychiatric Consultations
Abstract
Shared decision making is increasingly receiving attention in health care and might improve both the quality of care and patient outcomes. Nevertheless, due to its complexity, implementation of shared decision making in clinical practice seems challenging. This ethnographic study aimed to gain a better understanding of how psychiatric inpatients and the interprofessional care team interact during regular interprofessional psychiatric consultations. Data were collected through participant observation on two different psychiatric wards in a large psychiatric hospital in Switzerland. The observation focused on the contextual aspects of interprofessional patient consultations, the communication and interaction as well as the extent to which patients were involved in decision making. Participants included patients, psychiatrists, junior physicians, nurses, psychologists, social workers and therapists. We observed 71 interprofessional psychiatric consultations and they differed substantially in both wards in terms of context (place and form) and culture (way of interacting). On the contrary, results showed that the level of patient involvement in decision making was comparable and depended on individual factors, such as the health care professionals' communication style as well as the patients' personal initiative to be engaged. The main topics discussed with the patients related to pharmacotherapy and patient reported symptoms. Health care professionals in both wards used a rather unidirectional communication style. Therefore, in order to promote patient involvement in the psychiatric inpatient setting, rather than to focus on contextual factors, consultations should follow a specific agenda and promoting a bidirectional communication style for all parties involved is strongly recommended.
Keywords: clinical practice; communication; interprofessional psychiatric consultations; mental illness; participant observation; patient involvement; patient-centered care; psychiatric disorder; psychiatric inpatient setting; shared decision making.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Patients' and health professionals' perspectives regarding shared decision making in the psychiatric inpatient setting - A multiple qualitative case study.PEC Innov. 2024 Oct 21;5:100352. doi: 10.1016/j.pecinn.2024.100352. eCollection 2024 Dec 15. PEC Innov. 2024. PMID: 39659703 Free PMC article.
-
Conversation topics in psychiatric consultations conducted with and without a shared decision-making tool: A qualitative content analysis.Patient Educ Couns. 2024 Jan;118:108045. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.108045. Epub 2023 Oct 31. Patient Educ Couns. 2024. PMID: 37925974
-
The patient experience of patient-centered communication with nurses in the hospital setting: a qualitative systematic review protocol.JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):76-87. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1072. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015. PMID: 26447009
-
Conceptual understanding and applicability of shared decision-making in psychiatric care: An integrative review.J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2021 Aug;28(4):531-548. doi: 10.1111/jpm.12712. Epub 2020 Nov 29. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2021. PMID: 33191536 Review.
-
Overview of the main challenges in shared decision making in a multicultural and diverse society in the intensive and critical care setting.J Eval Clin Pract. 2020 Apr;26(2):520-523. doi: 10.1111/jep.13300. Epub 2019 Oct 29. J Eval Clin Pract. 2020. PMID: 31661726 Review.
Cited by
-
From Idealist to Realist-Designing and Implementing Shared Decision-Making Interventions in the Choice of Antipsychotic Prescription in People Living With Psychosis (SHAPE): A Realist Review (Part 2-Designing SDM Interventions: Optimizing Design and Local Implementation).Schizophr Bull. 2025 Jul 7;51(4):932-948. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbaf059. Schizophr Bull. 2025. PMID: 40396338 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Håkansson Eklund J., Holmström I.K., Kumlin T., Kaminsky E., Skoglund K., Höglander J., Sundler A.J., Condén E., Summer Merenius M. Same same or different? A review of reviews of person-centred and patient-centred care. Patient Educ. Couns. 2019;1:3–11. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2018.08.029. - DOI - PubMed
-
- World Health Organization Framework on Integrated, People-Centred Health Services: Report by the Secretariat. [(accessed on 15 December 2021)]. Available online: https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA69/A69_39-en.pdf.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources