The impact of shared decision-making on the treatment of anxiety and depressive disorders: systematic review

Tyler Marshall, Chelsea Stellick, Adam Abba-Aji, Richard Lewanczuk, Xin-Min Li, Karin Olson, Sunita Vohra
2021 BJPsych Open  
Shared decision-making encourages patients to explore treatment options/choices in collaboration with their healthcare provider, inclusive of the best available evidence and the patient's values/preferences. Several effective treatments exist for people with anxiety and/or depressive disorders; shared decision-making may be particularly useful in this context. Aims To investigate whether shared decision-making enhances clinical outcomes in adults with anxiety and/or depressive disorders. Method
more » ... A systematic review was conducted. Five electronic health databases were searched from database inception until August 2019, in addition to reference lists of included studies. Prospective controlled studies of shared decision-making in adults (aged 18–64 years) diagnosed with an anxiety and/or depressive disorder were included. Two reviewers independently conducted each stage of the review process. Results Six randomised controlled trials (N = 1834 participants) were included. Patient satisfaction improved in four studies. Patients were more likely to receive adequate treatment for depression in three studies. Anxiety symptoms decreased in one study. Patient involvement in decision-making increased in three studies. Because of the lack of blinded interventions and outcome assessment, the included studies were at moderate risk of bias. The certainty of evidence ranged from low to moderate, per GRADE criteria. Conclusions Shared decision-making shows promise for enhancing quality-of-care outcomes such as patient satisfaction, without increasing consultation time. but appears unlikely to improve symptoms of depression. However, it appears to be understudied in patients with anxiety disorders. Heterogeneity regarding definition and measurement of shared decision-making posed challenges for interpreting the results. More research is recommended to advance the field.
doi:10.1192/bjo.2021.1028 fatcat:pa47ibi2wnebjj5n4iassubpnq