title: Coaching and guidance with patient decision aids: A review of theoretical and empirical evidence.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Coaching and guidance are structured approaches that can be used within or alongside patient decision aids (PtDAs) to facilitate the process of decision making. Coaching is provided by an individual, and guidance is embedded within the decision support materials. The purpose of this paper is to: a) present updated definitions of the concepts "coaching" and "guidance"; b) present an updated summary of current theoretical and empirical insights into the roles played by coaching/guidance in the context of PtDAs; and c) highlight emerging issues and research opportunities in this aspect of PtDA design.
  
  
  METHODS
  We identified literature published since 2003 on shared decision making theoretical frameworks inclusive of coaching or guidance. We also conducted a sub-analysis of randomized controlled trials included in the 2011 Cochrane Collaboration Review of PtDAs with search results updated to December 2010. The sub-analysis was conducted on the characteristics of coaching and/or guidance included in any trial of PtDAs and trials that allowed the impact of coaching and/or guidance with PtDA to be compared to another intervention or usual care.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Theoretical evidence continues to justify the use of coaching and/or guidance to better support patients in the process of thinking about a decision and in communicating their values/preferences with others. In 98 randomized controlled trials of PtDAs, 11 trials (11.2%) included coaching and 63 trials (64.3%) provided guidance. Compared to usual care, coaching provided alongside a PtDA improved knowledge and decreased mean costs. The impact on some other outcomes (e.g., participation in decision making, satisfaction, option chosen) was more variable, with some trials showing positive effects and other trials reporting no differences. For values-choice agreement, decisional conflict, adherence, and anxiety there were no differences between groups. None of these outcomes were worse when patients were exposed to decision coaching alongside a PtDA. No trials evaluated the effect of guidance provided within PtDAs.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Theoretical evidence continues to justify the use of coaching and/or guidance to better support patients to participate in decision making. However, there are few randomized controlled trials that have compared the effectiveness of coaching used alongside PtDAs to PtDAs without coaching, and no trials have compared the PtDAs with guidance to those without guidance.
authors.forename: Dawn
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Stacey
authors.forename: Jennifer
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Kryworuchko
authors.forename: Jeff
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Belkora
authors.forename: B Joyce
authors.initials: BJ
authors.lastname: Davison
authors.forename: Marie-Anne
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Durand
authors.forename: Karen B
authors.initials: KB
authors.lastname: Eden
authors.forename: Aubri S
authors.initials: AS
authors.lastname: Hoffman
authors.forename: Mirjam
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Koerner
authors.forename: France
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Légaré
authors.forename: Marie-Chantal
authors.initials: MC
authors.lastname: Loiselle
authors.forename: Richard L
authors.initials: RL
authors.lastname: Street
mesh_terms: D003657:Decision Making; D003661:Decision Support Techniques; D006801:Humans; D010353:Patient Education as Topic; D010358:Patient Participation