Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28231777›Full record

Trial reportBMC psychiatry2017

Shared decision making PLUS - a cluster-randomized trial with inpatients suffering from schizophrenia (SDM-PLUS).

Johannes Hamann, Fabian Holzhüter, Lynne Stecher, Stephan Heres

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC psychiatry, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Shared decision making, aggression, and coercion in inpatients with schizophrenia.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2020
    Article
  9. Article
  10. [Long-acting antipsychotics: The QAAPAPLE algorithm review].Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2019
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Johannes HamannKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany. j.hamann@tum.de.
Fabian HolzhüterKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Lynne StecherInstitut für Medizinische Statistik und Epidemiologie, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Stephan HeresKlinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundShared decision making (SDM) is a model of how doctors and patients interact with each other. It aims at changing the traditional power asymmetry between doctors and patients by strengthening the exchange of information and the decisional position of the patient. Although SDM is generally welcomed by mental health patients as well as by mental health professionals its implementation in routine care, especially in the more acute settings, is still lacking. SDM-PLUS has been developed as an approach that addresses both patients and mental health professionals and aims at implementing SDM even for the very acutely ill patients.

methodsThe SDM-PLUS study will be performed as a matched-pair cluster-randomized trial in acute psychiatric wards. On wards allocated to the intervention group personnel will receive communication training (addressing how to implement SDM for various scenarios) and patients will receive a group intervention addressing patient skills for SDM. Wards allocated to the control condition will continue treatment as usual. A total sample size of 276 patients suffering from schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder on 12 wards is planned. The main outcome parameter will be patients' perceived involvement in decision making during the inpatient stay measured with the SDM-Q-9 questionnaire. Secondary objectives include the therapeutic relationship and long term outcomes such as medication adherence and rehospitalization rates. In addition, process measures and qualitative data will be obtained to allow for the analysis of potential barriers and facilitators of SDM-PLUS. The primary analysis will be a comparison of SDM-Q-9 sum scores 3 weeks after study inclusion (or discharge, if earlier) between the intervention and control groups. To assess the effect of the intervention on this continuous primary outcome, a random effects linear regression model will be fitted with ward (cluster) as a random effect term and intervention group as a fixed effect. DISCUSSION: This will be the first trial examining the SDM-PLUS approach for patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in very acute mental health inpatient settings. Within the trial a complex intervention will be implemented that addresses both patients and health care staff to yield maximum effects.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00010880 . Registered 09 August 2016.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsDecision MakingPatient ParticipationSchizophrenic PsychologyAdolescentAdultAgedCommunicationFemaleHumansInpatientsMaleMedication AdherenceMiddle AgedPsychotic DisordersRecurrenceAdherenceSchizophreniaShared decision making

Identifiers

PMID28231777
PMCPMC5324213

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.