Digital Shared Decision-Making Interventions in Mental Healthcare: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

Standard

Digital Shared Decision-Making Interventions in Mental Healthcare : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. / Vitger, Tobias; Korsbek, Lisa; Austin, Stephen F.; Petersen, Lone; Nordentoft, Merete; Hjorthoj, Carsten.

In: Frontiers in Psychiatry, Vol. 12, 691251, 2021.

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Vitger, T, Korsbek, L, Austin, SF, Petersen, L, Nordentoft, M & Hjorthoj, C 2021, 'Digital Shared Decision-Making Interventions in Mental Healthcare: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis', Frontiers in Psychiatry, vol. 12, 691251. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.691251

APA

Vitger, T., Korsbek, L., Austin, S. F., Petersen, L., Nordentoft, M., & Hjorthoj, C. (2021). Digital Shared Decision-Making Interventions in Mental Healthcare: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, [691251]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.691251

Vancouver

Vitger T, Korsbek L, Austin SF, Petersen L, Nordentoft M, Hjorthoj C. Digital Shared Decision-Making Interventions in Mental Healthcare: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in Psychiatry. 2021;12. 691251. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.691251

Author

Vitger, Tobias ; Korsbek, Lisa ; Austin, Stephen F. ; Petersen, Lone ; Nordentoft, Merete ; Hjorthoj, Carsten. / Digital Shared Decision-Making Interventions in Mental Healthcare : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. In: Frontiers in Psychiatry. 2021 ; Vol. 12.

Bibtex

@article{1552067f26e1415e864bcb36f60d4ca9,
title = "Digital Shared Decision-Making Interventions in Mental Healthcare: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis",
abstract = "Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) in mental healthcare has received increased attention as a process to reinforce person-centered care. With the rapid development of digital health technology, researchers investigate how digital interventions may be utilized to support SDM. Despite the promise of digital interventions to support SDM, the effect of these in mental healthcare has not been evaluated before. Thus, this paper aims to assess the effect of SDM interventions complimented by digital technology in mental healthcare.& nbsp;Objective: The objective of this review was to systematically examine the effectiveness of digital SDM interventions on patient outcomes as investigated in randomized trials.& nbsp;Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on digital SDM interventions for people with a mental health condition. We searched for relevant studies in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The search strategy included terms relating to SDM, digital systems, mental health conditions, and study type. The primary outcome was patient activation or indices of the same (e.g., empowerment and self-efficacy), adherence to treatment, hospital admissions, severity of symptoms, and level of functioning. Secondary outcomes were satisfaction, decisional conflict, working alliance, usage, and adherence of medicine; and adverse events were defined as harms or side effects.& nbsp;Results: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria with outcome data from 2,400 participants. Digital SDM interventions had a moderate positive effect as compared with a control condition on patient activation [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.56, CI: 0.10, 1.01, p = 0.02], a small effect on general symptoms (SMD = -0.17, CI: -0.31, -0.03, p = 0.02), and working alliance (SMD = 0.21, CI: 0.02, 0.41, p = 0.03) and for improving decisional conflict (SMD = -0.37, CI: -0.70, -0.05, p = 0.02). No effect was found on self-efficacy, other types of mental health symptoms, adverse events, or patient satisfaction. A total of 39 outcomes were narratively synthesized with results either favoring the intervention group or showing no significant differences between groups. Studies were generally assessed to have unclear or high risk of bias, and outcomes had a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) rating of low- or very low-quality evidence.& nbsp;Conclusions: Digital interventions to support SDM may be a promising tool in mental healthcare; but with the limited quality of research, we have little confidence in the estimates of effect. More quality research is needed to further assess the effectiveness of digital means to support SDM but also to determine which digital intervention features are most effective to support SDM.& nbsp;",
keywords = "shared decision-making, systematic review and meta-analysis, mental health, digital health (eHealth), patient activation, SCHIZOPHRENIA, DEPRESSION, EFFICACY, TRIAL",
author = "Tobias Vitger and Lisa Korsbek and Austin, {Stephen F.} and Lone Petersen and Merete Nordentoft and Carsten Hjorthoj",
year = "2021",
doi = "10.3389/fpsyt.2021.691251",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
journal = "Frontiers in Psychiatry",
issn = "1664-0640",
publisher = "Frontiers Research Foundation",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Digital Shared Decision-Making Interventions in Mental Healthcare

T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AU - Vitger, Tobias

AU - Korsbek, Lisa

AU - Austin, Stephen F.

AU - Petersen, Lone

AU - Nordentoft, Merete

AU - Hjorthoj, Carsten

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) in mental healthcare has received increased attention as a process to reinforce person-centered care. With the rapid development of digital health technology, researchers investigate how digital interventions may be utilized to support SDM. Despite the promise of digital interventions to support SDM, the effect of these in mental healthcare has not been evaluated before. Thus, this paper aims to assess the effect of SDM interventions complimented by digital technology in mental healthcare.& nbsp;Objective: The objective of this review was to systematically examine the effectiveness of digital SDM interventions on patient outcomes as investigated in randomized trials.& nbsp;Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on digital SDM interventions for people with a mental health condition. We searched for relevant studies in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The search strategy included terms relating to SDM, digital systems, mental health conditions, and study type. The primary outcome was patient activation or indices of the same (e.g., empowerment and self-efficacy), adherence to treatment, hospital admissions, severity of symptoms, and level of functioning. Secondary outcomes were satisfaction, decisional conflict, working alliance, usage, and adherence of medicine; and adverse events were defined as harms or side effects.& nbsp;Results: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria with outcome data from 2,400 participants. Digital SDM interventions had a moderate positive effect as compared with a control condition on patient activation [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.56, CI: 0.10, 1.01, p = 0.02], a small effect on general symptoms (SMD = -0.17, CI: -0.31, -0.03, p = 0.02), and working alliance (SMD = 0.21, CI: 0.02, 0.41, p = 0.03) and for improving decisional conflict (SMD = -0.37, CI: -0.70, -0.05, p = 0.02). No effect was found on self-efficacy, other types of mental health symptoms, adverse events, or patient satisfaction. A total of 39 outcomes were narratively synthesized with results either favoring the intervention group or showing no significant differences between groups. Studies were generally assessed to have unclear or high risk of bias, and outcomes had a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) rating of low- or very low-quality evidence.& nbsp;Conclusions: Digital interventions to support SDM may be a promising tool in mental healthcare; but with the limited quality of research, we have little confidence in the estimates of effect. More quality research is needed to further assess the effectiveness of digital means to support SDM but also to determine which digital intervention features are most effective to support SDM.& nbsp;

AB - Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) in mental healthcare has received increased attention as a process to reinforce person-centered care. With the rapid development of digital health technology, researchers investigate how digital interventions may be utilized to support SDM. Despite the promise of digital interventions to support SDM, the effect of these in mental healthcare has not been evaluated before. Thus, this paper aims to assess the effect of SDM interventions complimented by digital technology in mental healthcare.& nbsp;Objective: The objective of this review was to systematically examine the effectiveness of digital SDM interventions on patient outcomes as investigated in randomized trials.& nbsp;Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on digital SDM interventions for people with a mental health condition. We searched for relevant studies in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The search strategy included terms relating to SDM, digital systems, mental health conditions, and study type. The primary outcome was patient activation or indices of the same (e.g., empowerment and self-efficacy), adherence to treatment, hospital admissions, severity of symptoms, and level of functioning. Secondary outcomes were satisfaction, decisional conflict, working alliance, usage, and adherence of medicine; and adverse events were defined as harms or side effects.& nbsp;Results: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria with outcome data from 2,400 participants. Digital SDM interventions had a moderate positive effect as compared with a control condition on patient activation [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.56, CI: 0.10, 1.01, p = 0.02], a small effect on general symptoms (SMD = -0.17, CI: -0.31, -0.03, p = 0.02), and working alliance (SMD = 0.21, CI: 0.02, 0.41, p = 0.03) and for improving decisional conflict (SMD = -0.37, CI: -0.70, -0.05, p = 0.02). No effect was found on self-efficacy, other types of mental health symptoms, adverse events, or patient satisfaction. A total of 39 outcomes were narratively synthesized with results either favoring the intervention group or showing no significant differences between groups. Studies were generally assessed to have unclear or high risk of bias, and outcomes had a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) rating of low- or very low-quality evidence.& nbsp;Conclusions: Digital interventions to support SDM may be a promising tool in mental healthcare; but with the limited quality of research, we have little confidence in the estimates of effect. More quality research is needed to further assess the effectiveness of digital means to support SDM but also to determine which digital intervention features are most effective to support SDM.& nbsp;

KW - shared decision-making

KW - systematic review and meta-analysis

KW - mental health

KW - digital health (eHealth)

KW - patient activation

KW - SCHIZOPHRENIA

KW - DEPRESSION

KW - EFFICACY

KW - TRIAL

U2 - 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.691251

DO - 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.691251

M3 - Review

C2 - 34552514

VL - 12

JO - Frontiers in Psychiatry

JF - Frontiers in Psychiatry

SN - 1664-0640

M1 - 691251

ER -

ID: 280863248