TY  - JOUR
AU  - Pierce, Joni H
AU  - Weir, Charlene
AU  - Taft, Teresa
AU  - Richards II, William
AU  - McFarland, Mary M
AU  - Kawamoto, Kensaku
AU  - Del Fiol, Guilherme
AU  - Butler, Jorie M
PY  - 2025
DA  - 2025/2/21
TI  - Shared Decision-Making Tools Implemented in the Electronic Health Record: Scoping Review
JO  - J Med Internet Res
SP  - e59956
VL  - 27
KW  - shared decision-making
KW  - patient engagement
KW  - decision support
KW  - electronic health records
AB  - Background: Patient-centered care promotes the involvement of patients in decision-making related to their health care. The adoption and implementation of shared decision-making (SDM) into routine care are constrained by several obstacles, including technical and time constraints, clinician and patient attitudes and perceptions, and processes that exist outside the standardized clinical workflow. Objective: We aimed to understand the integration and implementation characteristics of reported SDM interventions integrated into an electronic health record (EHR) system. Methods: We conducted a scoping review using the methodological framework by Arksey and O’Malley with guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Eligibility criteria included original research and reviews focusing on SDM situations in a real-world clinical setting and EHR integration of SDM tools and processes. We excluded retrospective studies, conference abstracts, simulation studies, user design studies, opinion pieces, and editorials. To identify eligible studies, we searched the following databases on January 11, 2021: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, Cochrane Library including CENTRAL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection. We systematically categorized descriptive data and key findings in a tabular format using predetermined data charting forms. Results were summarized using tables and associated narratives related to the review questions. Results: Of the 2153 studies, 18 (0.84%) were included in the final review. There was a high degree of variation across studies, including SDM definitions, standardized measures, technical integration, and implementation strategies. SDM tools that targeted established health care processes promoted their use. Integrating SDM templates and tools into an EHR appeared to improve the targeted outcomes of most (17/18, 94%) studies. Most SDM interventions were designed for clinicians. Patient-specific goals and values were included in 56% (10/18) of studies. The 2 most common study outcome measures were SDM-related measures and SDM tool use. Conclusions: Understanding how to integrate SDM tools directly into a clinician’s workflow within the EHR is a logical approach to promoting SDM into routine clinical practice. This review contributes to the literature by illuminating features of SDM tools that have been integrated into an EHR system. Standardization of SDM tools and processes, including the use of patient decision aids, is needed for consistency across SDM studies. The implementation approaches for SDM applications showed varying levels of planning and effort to promote SDM intervention awareness. Targeting accepted and established clinical processes may enhance the adoption and use of SDM tools. Future studies designed as randomized controlled trials are needed to expand the quality of the evidence base. This includes the study of integration methods into EHR systems as well as implementation methods and strategies deployed to operationalize the uptake of the SDM-integrated tools. Emphasizing patients’ goals and values is another key area for future studies. 
SN  - 1438-8871
UR  - https://www.jmir.org/2025/1/e59956
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2196/59956
DO  - 10.2196/59956
ID  - info:doi/10.2196/59956
ER  -