‘So Let's Go On Like This?’—Shared Decision‐Making and the Use of Outcome Information in Routine Care Management for People With Multiple Sclerosis

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction This study aimed to investigate how shared decision‐making (SDM) and the use of different types of outcome information are applied in routine care management for people with multiple sclerosis (MS) in an academic outpatient clinic. Methods This qualitative study used the following: (a) observations of clinical encounters (N = 23) between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs), (b) interviews with those patients (N = 17) and (c) interviews with those HCPs (N = 7). HCPs were not trained in SDM before the study. Audio recordings were transcribed literally. Transcriptions were analysed using qualitative thematic analysis. Results Outcome information was hardly discussed with patients, apart from clinical outcome information at an individual level, such as MRI or lab results. This use of clinical outcome information did not automatically lead to a process of SDM. HCPs tended to implicitly present choices to patients after signalling and discussing ‘problems’. In the interviews, patients indicated that they tended to consent to the advice given by HCPs and to prefer not too much change in treatment plans. However, they also emphasized the importance of being informed about available options with benefits and harms. We observed multiple discussions about patients' preferences, especially related to patients' experiences and priorities. Conclusions Overall, SDM and the use of different types of outcome information did not seem to be enacted in routine care management for people with MS, mostly because choices were not explicitly mentioned or discussed. However, discussions about patients' experiences and priorities did take place. Training HCPs further and developing patient information seem reasonable steps to proceed. Patient or Public Contribution People with MS contributed as research participants and provided us with their experiences in interviews. Furthermore, representatives of two patient organizations contributed to the study by reviewing the interview protocol for people with MS.

Keywords

• multiple sclerosis
• outcome information
• patient‐reported outcome measures
• shared decision‐making