ObjectiveTo summarize the application of shared decision-making support tools in the screening and treatment stages of colorectal cancer, as well as the influencing factors for the effective implementation of shared decision-making, in order to provide references for optimizing the comprehensive management model of colorectal cancer, formulating personalized doctor-patient communication strategies, and improving the shared decision-making support system. MethodA systematic search was conducted in Chinese and English databases for relevant literature on the application of shared decision-making in colorectal cancer patients, followed by a summary and analysis. ResultsShared decision-making can improve patient satisfaction with decision-making and treatment adherence, as well as enhance the doctor-patient relationship. Decision-making support tools demonstrate good efficacy across all stages of colorectal cancer screening and treatment; however, numerous factors influence their effective implementation, necessitating further optimization based on patient characteristics and clinical circumstances. ConclusionsShared decision-making is an important model for the comprehensive management of colorectal cancer. Future efforts should focus on enhancing healthcare providers’ communication skills, developing personalized decision-making tools, and addressing patients’ psychological and economic needs to promote the widespread adoption of shared decision-making.
This article explores the application and research progress of shared decision-making (SDM) tools in ultra-early vascular recanalization therapy for ischemic stroke, focusing on analyzing the functional characteristics and advantages and disadvantages of various tools. Based on functional goals, SDM tools can be divided into four categories: brief decision aids, risk communication tools, patient information tools, and prognosis assessment tools. These tools can assist patients and doctors in making informed treatment decisions quickly in time-sensitive situations, providing a reference for optimizing stroke revascularization treatment. Additionally, SDM tools can facilitate communication between doctors and patients, enabling patients to better understand the risks and benefits of treatment options, leading to choices more aligned with personal preferences and values. Through an in-depth study of these SDM tools, it is expected to improve the diagnostic and treatment efficiency for stroke patients, reduce decision conflicts, promote collaboration between doctors and patients, and provide new ideas and methods for stroke treatment and management.
Objective To investigate the impact of shared decision-making (SDM) intervention on treatment expectations, decisional conflict, and satisfaction in patients with lung cancer and mediastinal tumors, aiming to provide a basis for optimizing personalized diagnosis and treatment models for oncology patients. MethodsPatients with lung cancer and mediastinal tumors who met the inclusion criteria, admitted by a single medical team in the Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, from November 2024 to May 2025, were randomly assigned to either a SDM group or a control group using a random number table method. The control group received conventional diagnostic and treatment interventions, while the SDM group received SDM-assisted interventions in addition to the conventional care. Baseline characteristics, treatment expectations, decisional conflict, and satisfaction were compared between the two groups. ResultsA total of 137 patients were included (69 patients in the SDM group, 68 patients in the control group). In the SDM group, there were 30 males and 39 females, with a mean age of (53.17±15.13) years. In the control group, there were 22 males and 46 females, with a mean age of (53.19±15.91) years. After intervention, the change score for treatment expectations in the SDM group was significantly lower than that in the control group [–9.0 (–9.0, –8.0) points vs. –2.0 (–3.0, –2.0) points, P<0.001]. The change score for decisional conflict in the SDM group was also significantly lower than that in the control group [–21.0 (–29.0, –12.0) points vs. –4.5 (–14.5, 1.0) points, P<0.001]. However, there was no statistically significant difference in satisfaction between the two groups [SDM group: 10.0 (10.0, 10.0) points vs. control group: 10.0 (10.0, 10.0) points, P=0.552]. ConclusionSDM intervention can effectively reduce the deviation in treatment expectations and decisional conflict in patients with lung cancer and mediastinal tumors. It holds important clinical value for enhancing patient engagement in care and optimizing personalized diagnosis and treatment processes.
