Exploring Shared Decision-Making | 83 3 Table 2. OPTION-scores per item Item Behavior description Surgeons Median (range) Patients Median (range) Relatives Median (range) 1 Goal talk: identify patient values and goals of care 37.5% (0-75.0%) 50.0%, (0-100%) 25.0% (0-75.0%) 2 Alternative option talk: discussion of alternate options 50.0% (0-100%) 25.0% (0-100%) 25.0% (0-75.0%) 3 Team talk: forming a partnership 62.5% (12.5-100%) 50.0% (0-100%) 37.5% (0-75.0%) 4 Option talk: information about options 75.0% (12.5-100%) 50.0% (0-100%) 37.5% (0-75.0%) 5 Decision talk: eliciting patient’s preferences 50.0% (0-100%) 50.0% (0-100%) 37.5% (0-87.5.0%) 6 Integrative decision talk: integrating patient’s preferences 43.8% (0-100%) 43.8% (0-100%) 25.0% (0-75.0%) 7 Evaluation talk: check satisfaction with choice and SDM process 37.5% (0-100%) 37.5% (0-100%) 25.0% (0-75.0%) Note: The categories are indicated in colors: low score is white (score between 0% and 33.3%), moderate score is light grey (score between 33.3% and 66.6%), and high score is dark grey (score between 66.6% and 100%). Perceived levels of SDM The surgeons gave themselves a median SDM-Q-Doc score of 71.1%, with a wide range (26.7-91%). None of them rated themselves the maximum 100% score (Appendix F). The highest median score was observed for item 9 ‘agreement’ with a score of five points, while items 7 ‘weighing’ and 8 ‘decision’ had the lowest median scores of three points. Similarly, patients had a median SDM-Q-9 score of 74.4% (range 8.9-100%). A quarter of the patients (9/36) rated the consultation with the maximum SDM-Q-9 score (100%). Item 5 ‘understanding’ received the highest median score of five points, while items 6 ‘preference’ and 7 ‘weighing’ scored the lowest with a median of 3.5 points. Appendix G presents the scoring on the SDM-Q-Doc and SDM-Q-9 per item. When comparing scores for the perceived level of SDM, a Bland-Altman analysis showed that the SDM-Q-9 scores were significantly higher than the SDM-Q-Doc scores, with a small mean difference of 2.5%. However, also several opposing scores were observed. The plot can be found in Appendix H.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw