Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40213416›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2025

Clinicians perspectives towards the application of shared decision making in tertiary CVD care including the multidisciplinary heart team.

Mirjam M Garvelink, Tom Oirbans, Lea M Dijksman, Paul B van der Nat, Dennis van Veghel, Daniela N Schulz, Marcel G W Dijkgraaf, Lucas V A Boersma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Mirjam M GarvelinkIQHealthcare, RadboudUMC, Nijmegen, the Netherlands & Department of Value Based Healthcare, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
Tom OirbansDepartment of Value Based Healthcare, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein & Department of Cardiology, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
Lea M DijksmanDepartment of Value Based Healthcare, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
Paul B van der NatDepartment of Value Based Healthcare, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein & IQHealthcare, RadboudUMC, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Dennis van VeghelDepartment of Cardiology and Cardiothoracic Surgery, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Daniela N SchulzDepartment of Cardiology and Cardiothoracic Surgery, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Marcel G W DijkgraafDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Lucas V A BoersmaDepartment of Cardiology, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Shared decision-making (SDM), is a sine qua non in healthcare. Yet, it has been difficult to implement SDM in routine practice for patients with cardiovascular disease(CVD). To improve this, we aimed to determine HCPs perspectives on their SDM behavior in CVD context and influencing factors, and with special focus on multidisciplinary heartteams. Methods: Cross-sectional survey between March-July 2022 with cardiologists, cardiothoracic surgeons, medical residents, and nurse practitioners within two of the largest tertiary cardiac Centers in the Netherlands. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data; open-ended questions were thematically analyzed. Results: 72 participants completed the survey. Respondents indicated to know "very well" what SDM entailed (70 %) and had positive attitudes towards SDM (90 %). Participants used SDM in daily practice (SDMQDoc = 73/100), but indicated that more SDM could be performed (67 %). In self-reported definitions of SDM, explaining the consequences of treatment (step 2) and discussing patients' preferences (step 3) were most frequently mentioned. Barriers for SDM were patient and process characteristics: e.g. lack of time (70 %), understaffing (35 %). The heartteam was seen as potential facilitator, but its current role and process were seen as barrier for SDM. Facilitators for SDM were managerial support (16 %), decision aids (28 %), and SDM-training (13 %). Conclusion: HCPs reported high knowledge and application of SDM, but overlooked some steps in the SDM-process. A multifaceted intervention is needed focusing on awareness, enhancing communication skills and system level support. Specific improvements were identified to improve SDM for patients discussed by the multidisciplinary heartteam.

Indexed as

BarriersCardiovascular diseaseShared decision-makingTertiary center

Identifiers

PMID40213416
PMCPMC11985153

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.