Background: In the last decades, shared decision-making (SDM) models have been developed to increase patient involvement in treatment decisions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a SDM intervention (SDMI) for patients dependent on psychoactive substances in addiction health care programs. The intervention consisted of a structured procedure to reach a treatment agreement and comprised 5 sessions. Methods: Clinicians in 3 treatment centres in the Netherlands were randomly assigned to the SDMI or a standard procedure to reach a treatment agreement. Results: A total of 220 substance-dependent patients receiving inpatient treatment were randomised either to the intervention (n = 111) or control (n = 109) conditions. Reductions in primary substance use (F(1, 124) = 248.38, p < 0.01) and addiction severity (F(8) = 27.76, p < 0.01) were found in the total population. Significant change was found in the total population regarding patients’ quality of life measured at baseline, exit and follow-up (F(2, 146) = 5.66, p < 0.01). On the European Addiction Severity Index, SDMI showed significantly better improvements than standard decision-making regarding drug use (F(1, 164) = 7.40, p < 0.01) and psychiatric problems (F(1, 164) = 5.91, p = 0.02) at 3-month follow-up. Conclusion: SDMI showed a significant add-on effect on top of a well-established 3-month inpatient intervention. SDMI offers an effective, structured, frequent and well-balanced intervention to carry out and evaluate a treatment agreement.

Keywords:
Decision-making, shared, Abstinence, Substance dependence, Addiction severity, Quality of life
1.
Robinson A, Thomson R: Variability in patient preferences for participating in medial decision making: implication for the use of decision support tools (review). Qual Health Care 2001;10(suppl 1):34–38.
2.
Charles C, Whelan T, Gafni A: What do we mean by partnership in making decisions about treatment? BMJ 1999;319:780–782.
3.
Faller H: Shared decision making: an approach to strengthening patient participation in rehabilitation. Rehabilitation (Stuttg) 2003;42:129–135.
4.
Hamann J, Leucht S, Kissling W: Shared decision making in psychiatry. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2003;107:403–409.
5.
Frosch DL, Kaplan RM: Shared decision making in clinical medicine: past research and future directions. Am J Prev Med 1999;17:285–294.
6.
Jordan JL, Ellis SJ, Chambers R: Defining shared decision making and concordance: are they one and the same? Postgrad Med J 2002;78:383–384.
7.
Montgomery AA, Fahey T: How do patients’ treatment preferences compare with those of clinicians? Qual Health Care 2001;10(suppl 1):i39–i43.
8.
Makoul G, Clayman ML: An integrative model of shared decision making in medial encounters. Patient Educ Couns 2006;60:301–312.
9.
Crawford MJ, Aldridge T, Bhui K, Rutter D, Manley C, Weaver T, Tyrer P, Fulop N: User involvement in the planning and delivery of mental health services: a cross-sectional survey of service users and providers. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2003;107:410–414.
10.
Montori VM, Gafni A, Charles C: A shared treatment decision-making approach between patients with chronic conditions and their clinicians: the case of diabetes. Health Expect 2006;9:25–36.
11.
Joosten EA, DeFuentes-Merillas L, De Weert GH, Sensky T, Van der Staak CP, De Jong CA: Systematic review of the effects of shared decision making on patient satisfaction, treatment adherence and health status. Psychother Psychosom 2008;77:219–226.
12.
Adams JR, Drake RE: Shared decision-making and evidence-based practice. Community Ment Health J 2006;42:87–105.
13.
American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, ed 4. Washington, American Psychiatric Association, 1994.
14.
Rollnick S, Miller WR: What is motivational interviewing? Behav Cogn Psychother 1995;23:325–334.
15.
Phelan M, Slade M, Thornicroft G, Dunn G, Holloway F, Wykes T, Strathdee G, Loftus L, McCrone P, Hayward P: The Camberwell assessment of need: the validity and reliability of an instrument to assess the needs of people with severe mental illness. Br J Psychiatry 1995;167:589–595.
16.
McCrone P, Leese M, Thornicroft G, Schene AH, Knudsen HC, Vazquea-Barquero JL, Lasalvia A, Padfield S, White IR, Griffiths G: Reliability of the Camberwell Assessment of Need – European Version. EPSILON study 6: European psychiatric services: inputs linked to outcome domains and needs. Br J Psychiatry 2000;39:34–40.
17.
Varo CR, Torres Gonzalez F, Luna del Castillo J, Jimenez Estevez J, Martinez Montes G: Reliability of the Spanish version of the Camberwell assessment of needs. Actas Esp Psiquiatr 2002;30:99–104.
18.
Cronbach LJ: Essentials of Psychological Testing. New York, Harper and Row, 1990.
19.
McLellan AT, Luborsky L, Woody GE, O’Brien CP: An improved diagnostic evaluation instrument for substance abuse patients: the Addiction Severity Index. J Nerv Ment Dis 1980;168:26–33.
20.
Hendriks VM, Kaplan CD, Van Limbeek J, Geerlings PJ: The Addiction Severity Index: reliability and validity in a Dutch addict population. J Subst Abuse Treat 1989;6:133–141.
21.
Hartgers C, Hendriks V, van der Meer CW, Blanken P: De Nederlandse vertaling van de Europese versie van de Addiction Severity Index, 5e Editie (Dutch Translation of the European Version of the Addiction Severity Index, ed 5). Amsterdam, AIAR, 1994.
22.
Compton WM, Cottler LB, Dorsey KB, Spitznagel EL, Mager DE: Comparing assessments of DSM-IV substance dependence disorders using CIDI-SAM and SCAN. Drug Alcohol Depend 1996;41:179–187.
23.
Lamers LM, Stalmeier PF, McDonnell J, Krabbe PF, van Busschbach JJ: Measuring the quality of life in economic evaluations: the Dutch EQ-5D tariff (in Dutch). Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2005;149:1574–1578.
24.
Dunn C, Deroo L, Rivara FP: The use of brief interventions adapted from motivational interviewing across behavioural domains: a systematic review. Addiction 2001;96:1725–1742.
25.
Burke BL, Arkowitz H, Menchola M: The efficacy of motivational interviewing: a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trails. J Consult Clin Psychol 2003;71:843–861.
26.
Cohen J: Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences, ed 2. Hillsdale, Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, 1988.
27.
Marissen MA, Franken IH, Blanken P, van den Brink W, Hendriks VM: Cue exposure therapy for the treatment of opiate addiction: results of a randomized controlled trial. Psychother Psychosom 2007;76:97–105.
28.
Dennis ML, Scott CK, Funk R, Foss MA: The duration of correlates of addiction and treatment careers. J Subst Abuse Treat 2005;28(suppl 1):S51–S62.
29.
Sirri L, Grandi S, Fava GA: The illness attitude scales. Psychother Psychosom 2008;77:337–350.
30.
Goldring AB, Taylor SE, Kemeny ME, Anton PA: Impact of health beliefs, quality of life, and physician-patient relationship on the treatment intentions of inflammatory bowel disease patients. Health Psychol 2002;21:219–228.
31.
McNutt RA: Shared medical decision making: problems, process, progress. JAMA 2004;292:2516–2518.
© 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel
2009
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.