Policy Options to Encourage Patient-Physician Shared Decision Making

By Ann S. O'Malley, Emily R. Carrier, Elizabeth Docteur, Alison C. Shmerling and Eugene C. Rich

Major discrepancies exist between patient preferences and the medical care they receive for many common conditions. Shared decision making (SDM) is a process where a patient and clinician faced with more than one medically acceptable treatment option jointly decide which option is best based on current evidence and the patient’s needs, preferences and values.

Many believe shared decision making can help bridge the gap between the care patients want and the care they receive. At the same time, SDM may help constrain heath care spending by avoiding treatments that patients don’t want.

However, barriers exist to wider use of shared decision making, including lack of reimbursement for physicians to adopt SDM under the existing fee-for-service payment system that rewards higher service volume; insufficient information on how best to train clinicians to weigh evidence and discuss treatment options for preference-sensitive conditions with patients; and clinician concerns about malpractice liability. Moreover, challenges to engaging some patients in shared decision making range from low health literacy to fears they will be denied needed care. Adding to these challenges is a climate of political hyperbole that stifles discussion about shared decision making, particularly when applied to difficult end-of-life-care decisions.

The 2010 health reform law established a process to encourage shared decision making, including setting standards for patient-decision aids (PDAs) and certification of these tools by an independent entity.

However, Congress has not appropriated funding for these tasks. Along with ensuring the scientific rigor and quality of patient-decision aids, liability protections and additional payments for clinicians are other policy options that may foster shared decision making.

In the longer term, including SDM as an important feature of delivery system and payment reforms, such as patient-centered medical homes, accountable care organizations and meaningful use of health information technology, also could help advance health system changes to improve care and contain costs.

Click here to download the full study (.pdf).

Note: This article originally appeared on http://www.nihcr.org/ and is compliments of the National Institute for Health Care Reform.

More Tools & Technology Articles

Social Media Empowers Consumers

Gone are the days where the only place one could learn about his/her disease or injury was within the four walls of the treating physician’s office. Social media will continue to be a powerful tool for the empowered consumer looking for information about their doctors and diseases.

HealthCare Consumerism Radio: Torben Nielsen, General Manager, Healthsparq

Hosts Brent Macy, Managing Director with The Institute for HealthCare Consumerism (IHC), and Ron Bachman, Chairman of the Editorial Advisory Board, speak with Torben Nielsen, General Manager with HealthSparq. Torben speaks on how transparency drives increased consumerism and how this, in turn, can lead to cost reductions.

American Health Care Costs Higher for Many Standard Procedures

ConnectYourCare News: Dependable medical assistance is crucial for Americans, but many people could face higher-than-average medical bills if they need various health care procedures.

The Best Health Care Decision is Realizing That There Are Choices

I empathize with people who don’t take an active role in their health care decisions. There are real barriers to any of us really getting engaged: limited information about price and quality, a perpetuated culture of “doctor knows best,” and a daunting and confusing set of rules about coverage. Who

Requests for permissions to reuse content contact Copyright Clearance Center at info@copyright.com