Comparison of the CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 questionnaires to appreciate the patient-reported level of shared decision-making. Issue 7 (July 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ubbink, Dirk T.; van Asbeck, Ellyze V.; Aarts, Johanna W.M.; Stubenrouch, Fabienne E.; Geerts, Paul A.F.; Atsma, Femke; Meinders, Marjan J.
• Is Part Of: Patient education and counseling. Volume 105:Issue 7(2022)
• Page Start: 2475
• Page End: 2479
• Publication Date: 2022-07
• Subjects: Shared decision-making -- Questionnaires: CollaboRATE: SDM-Q-9: psychometrics: comparison; Patient education -- Periodicals; Health counseling -- Periodicals; Health education -- Periodicals; Counseling -- Periodicals; Patient Education -- Periodicals; Éducation des patients -- Périodiques; Counseling -- Périodiques; Éducation sanitaire -- Périodiques; 615.5071
• DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2022.03.007
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0738-3991

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To compare CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 questionnaires when appreciating patient-perceived level of shared decision-making (SDM) in doctor-patient consultations. Methods: Data were harvested from five separate studies on SDM, conducted in three university and one large community hospital in the Netherlands, using Dutch versions of both questionnaires. CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 scores were expressed as percentages. Correlation was assessed using Spearman's Rho coefficient. Bland&Altman analysis was used to assess the degree of agreement. Top scores were calculated to assess possible ceiling effects. Results: The five studies included 442 patients. Median CollaboRATE scores (88.9%, IQR 81.5–100%) were significantly higher (p < 0.001) than SDM-Q-9 scores (80.0%, IQR 64.4–100%). Correlation was moderate (Rho=0.53, p < 0.001). A systematic, 12.5-point higher score was found across the range of scores when using CollaboRATE. Top scores for CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 were present in 37.5% and 17% of questionnaires, respectively. Conclusions: Overall, CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 questionnaires showed a high level of patient-perceived SDM. However, CollaboRATE only moderately correlated with SDM-Q-9 and had a stronger ceiling effect. Practice implications: When choosing a SDM-measurement tool, its benefits and limitations should be weighed. These metrics should be combined with objective scores of SDM, as these may differ from the patients' subjective interpretation. Highlights: CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9 are used to appreciate patient-reported levels of SDM. However, both show different scores and ceiling effects, and correlate moderately. Subjective and objective metrics should be used to score SDM in clinical practice.