Search

Abstract Background Shared decision-making is an approach to making treatment-based decisions that rely on the patient encounter and clear discussions between the patient and the healthcare provider. Patients with arthritis of the knee frequently seek care, and depending on arthritis severity and impact on daily life, joint arthroplasty may be considered as a treatment option. We will conduct a systematic review of shared decision-making trials in knee arthroplasty to determine the types of shared decision-making approaches used and their impact on care received. Methods Our systematic review will describe and critically appraise shared decision approaches used in randomized trials of patients undergoing knee arthroplasty, the types of outcomes reported, and the impact of these approaches on the patients’ care. We will use the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library, from inception through December 2018. Additionally, we will assess ongoing research by querying experts and searching trial registries. Discussion This study will characterize shared decision-making (SDM) approaches in knee arthroplasty randomized clinical trials and will summarize their effects of SDM on clinical and patient-reported outcomes. We anticipate this review will bring to light knowledge gaps and inform further research into the design and use of shared decision-making approaches in lower extremity arthroplasty. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019123586

Importance: A contributing factor to the gap between research publication and clinical implementation is the lack of specificity used when reporting findings., Objective: This scoping review used the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) to determine which elements of specificity are most often present and omitted from research using Ayres Sensory Integration® (ASI)., Data Sources: The following databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and ERIC., Study Selection and Data Collection: Eligible studies used ASI in an outpatient setting with children who had sensory integration or processing difficulties. Studies selected were quantitative (Level 1, 2, 3, or 4), available in full text, peer reviewed, and published in English within the past 20 yr., Findings: Of the 22 studies that met inclusion criteria, 100% included ingredients (actions of the therapist), 63% included mechanisms of action (reasoning behind these actions), 86% included targets, and 23% described client progression. We also found that 49% of all ingredients were listed in conjunction with a target, 15% were listed in conjunction with a mechanism of action, and 11% were listed in conjunction with both a target and a mechanism of action., Conclusions and Relevance: Findings indicate that many studies list ingredients but often omit the mechanism of action. This omission makes replication of the intervention increasingly difficult and prevents a deeper understanding of the clinical reasoning process behind the intervention. Plain-Language Summary: Gaps identified in this scoping review highlight inconsistencies in the reporting of treatment specificity that may affect the replication and translation of Ayres Sensory Integration® (ASI) research into practice., (Copyright © 2024 by the American Occupational Therapy Association, Inc.)