Clinical issues in shared decision-making applied to XXXX .

@entity1 @entity5 @entity148 @entity0
OBJECTIVES: To assess (1) the clinical issues addressed during the medical encounter; (2) the feasibility of the process of shared decision-making in clinical practice and (3) @entity1 ' desires concerning the question of 'who should take the decision in @entity0 treatments?' DESIGN: Qualitative pilot study based on clinical encounters using decision boards and information booklets. SETTING: Centre L  on B  rard, a comprehensive @entity5 centre in the Rh  ne-Alpes region of France. @entity1 : One @entity0 surgeon and 22 @entity0 @entity1 . MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Analysis of @entity1 ' reactions to a shared decision-making process concerning surgery and chemotherapy, and analysis of its practical feasibility (i.e. duration of the consultations). RESULTS: (1) Twenty-one @entity1 participated in the decision regarding surgery; all chose conservative treatment; 15 @entity1 had their own say about chemotherapy (nine chose no chemotherapy, six chose chemotherapy). (2) Participating in treatment choice generated @entity148 for a majority of @entity1 . Some were dissatisfied because they had to make a choice and consequently to give up the other option. Finally, some were uncertain about making the right choice. Nevertheless, most were satisfied with the information given and the possibility of participating to the treatment decision-making process. (3) The total duration of the entire process of shared decision-making is consistent with the time spent with @entity1 with such a severe disease. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Most of the @entity1 expressed their satisfaction regarding the possibility to participate in treatment decision-making, knowing that offering treatment choice is very unusual in France. From this pilot study it appears that shared decision-making is feasible in clinical practice. Nevertheless, a quantitative study based on a large sample of @entity1 is necessary to: (1) confirm this hypothesis, (2) ensure that @entity1 are willing to participate in their treatment decision-making, and (3) measure the potential benefits related to this participation.
