Healthcare professionals' behaviour regarding the implementation of shared decision-making in screening programmes: A systematic review
Objective: To explore the barriers to and facilitators of healthcare professionals' implementation of SDM regarding screening programmes. Method: A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINHAL, and PsyscInfo. The barriers and facilitators identified were classified into t...
| Autores: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) |
| Repositorio: | Dadun. Depósito Académico Digital de la Universidad de Navarra |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:dnet:dadun_______::278edf0779b1ea1726c0a0046c649563 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/10171/124648 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Heatlhcare professional Participation in preventive health Screening programmes |
| Sumario: | Objective: To explore the barriers to and facilitators of healthcare professionals' implementation of SDM regarding screening programmes. Method: A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINHAL, and PsyscInfo. The barriers and facilitators identified were classified into three factors based on their origin: patients, healthcare system performance, and healthcare professionals themselves. Results: Eight studies were selected: seven related to cancer screening. The most significant facilitators were literacy and interest in active participation, both of which have their origins in patients. The most significant barriers identified for the first time in a systematic review were legal conflict, lack of remuneration and lack of flexibility in clinical guidelines in screening programmes. Conclusion: The results of this study show that there are differences between barriers and facilitators for SDM when it is applied in the context of healthy people who perform preventive activities, particularly screening, in contrast to general medical consultation contexts. Practical implications: The authors suggest that to advance in the practice of SDM, we need to develop and disseminate training documents. Further, SDM should be incorporated into clinical guidelines. There should be more studies focusing on healthcare professionals' behaviour within the context of the uncertainty of screening programmes. |
|---|