Background Multiple treatment options are generally available for most diseases. Shared decision‐making (SDM) helps patients and physicians choose the treatment option that best fits a patient's preferences. This review aimed to assess the extent to which SDM is applied during surgical consultations, and the metrics used to measure SDM and SDM‐related outcomes. Methods This was a systematic review of observational studies and clinical trials that measured SDM during consultations in which surgery was a treatment option. Embase, MEDLINE and CENTRAL were searched. Study selection, quality assessment and data extraction were conducted by two investigators independently. Results Thirty‐two articles were included. SDM was measured using nine different metrics. Thirty‐six per cent of 13 176 patients and surgeons perceived their consultation as SDM, as opposed to patient‐ or surgeon‐driven. Surgeons more often perceived the decision‐making process as SDM than patients (43·6 versus 29·3 per cent respectively). SDM levels scored objectively using the OPTION and Decision Analysis System for Oncology instruments ranged from 7 to 39 per cent. Subjective SDM levels as perceived by surgeons and patients ranged from 54 to 93 per cent. Patients experienced a higher level of SDM during consultations than surgeons (93 versus 84 per cent). Twenty‐five different SDM‐related outcomes were reported. Conclusion At present, SDM in surgery is still in its infancy, although surgeons and patients both think of it favourably. Future studies should evaluate the effect of new interventions to improve SDM during surgical consultations, and its assessment using available standardized and validated metrics.

OBJECTIVE Conflicting evidence exists on the effects of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) in the treatment of chronic ischemic leg ulcers. The aim of this trial was to investigate whether additional HBOT would benefit patients with diabetes and ischemic leg ulcers. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Patients with diabetes with an ischemic wound (n = 120) were randomized to standard care (SC) without or with HBOT (SC+HBOT). Primary outcomes were limb salvage and wound healing after 12 months, as well as time to wound healing. Other end points were amputation-free survival (AFS) and mortality. RESULTS Both groups contained 60 patients. Limb salvage was achieved in 47 patients in the SC group vs. 53 patients in the SC+HBOT group (risk difference [RD] 10% [95% CI −4 to 23]). After 12 months, 28 index wounds were healed in the SC group vs. 30 in the SC+HBOT group (RD 3% [95% CI −14 to 21]). AFS was achieved in 41 patients in the SC group and 49 patients in the SC+HBOT group (RD 13% [95% CI −2 to 28]). In the SC+HBOT group, 21 patients (35%) were unable to complete the HBOT protocol as planned. Those who did had significantly fewer major amputations and higher AFS (RD for AFS 26% [95% CI 10–38]). CONCLUSIONS Additional HBOT did not significantly improve complete wound healing or limb salvage in patients with diabetes and lower-limb ischemia.

Objectives Evidence-based practice (EBP) may help improve healthcare quality. However, not all healthcare professionals and managers use EBP in their daily practice. We systematically reviewed the literature to summarise self-reported appreciation of EBP and organisational infrastructure solutions proposed to promote EBP. Design Systematic review. Two investigators independently performed the systematic reviewing process. Information sources MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched for publications between 2000 and 2011. Eligibility criteria for included studies Reviews and surveys of EBP attitude, knowledge, awareness, skills, barriers and facilitators among managers, doctors and nurses in clinical settings. Results We found 31 surveys of fairly good quality. General attitude towards EBP was welcoming. Respondents perceived several barriers, but also many facilitators for EBP implementation. Solutions were proposed at various organisational levels, including (inter)national associations and hospital management promoting EBP, pregraduate and postgraduate education, as well as individual support by EBP mentors on the wards to move EBP from the classroom to the bedside. Conclusions More than 20 years after its introduction, the EBP paradigm has been embraced by healthcare professionals as an important means to improve quality of patient care, but its implementation is still deficient. Policy exerted at microlevel , middlelevel and macrolevel, and supported by professional, educational and managerial role models, may further facilitate EBP.