People who are diagnosed with heart valve disease are often confronted with a wide range of treatment options when they ultimately require a valve repair or replacement. In 2021, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio‑Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) published new guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease, which state that ‘the patient and their family should be thoroughly informed and assisted in their decision on the best treatment option’.
Shared decision-making is not simply a case of clinicians educating a person about their illness. It involves doctors and patients working together to choose the most suitable treatment, with the patient’s personal preferences and goals considered fully alongside clinical evidence and the doctor’s expertise.
One-page summary
Participating in decisions about my care for heart valve diseaseThe Global Heart Hub commissioned HPP to lead on the research and writing of a patient guide to shared decision-making in heart valve disease. Working with an Advisory Board comprising clinical and patient experts, we drafted a full patient guide and a one-page supporting summary, which people with heart valve disease can print and take with them to medical appointments.
The patient guide is based around key stages in the patient journey, from diagnosis to heart valve repair or replacement. It outlines what the ESC/EACTS guidelines say and the opportunities for the person with heart valve disease to participate in decisions about their care at each step of the process. It also contains a shared decision-making checklist to help guide conversations with healthcare professionals.
This guide seeks to empower people with heart valve disease to express their goals and treatment preferences to their care team. It does not seek to replicate or replace established clinical guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease.
These documents were commissioned by the Global Heart Hub and written by The Health Policy Partnership, with co-authorship from an expert Advisory Board. The Advisory Board had full editorial control over content. The initiative was supported by a grant from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic.
