Abstract:Accessible Summary What Is Known on the Subject? Patients do not always receive enough information about their diagnosis and their perceived participation in decision‐making about their treatment is low. Some participants reported feeling very uncertain when the physician invited them to choose between these options. Others users expressed their satisfaction with the trend away from paternalistic attitudes in the health system. There is a trend towards pharmacological prescription as a first approximation. This contrasts with the recommendations of scientific organizations based on evidence and cost‐effectiveness studies on the offer of psychological interventions as the first option. The user groups pointed out that active coping, based on exposure to anxiety‐generating situations, made a significant contribution to alleviating their anxiety disorders. However, some of those interviewed rejected this type of intervention. What the Paper Adds to Existing Knowledge? Users diagnosed with anxiety disorders miss more information about the disorder and participation in its treatment. Opposite positions coexist in terms of participation in the choice of treatment. Pharmacological treatment is most commonly the first option offered. What Are the Implications for Practice? This study is an example in itself of the involvement of users in the healthcare process, and therefore placing them at the centre of attention, as reflected in healthcare policies and clinical practice guidelines. It promotes the identification of needs that users diagnosed of anxiety disorders may have, with the aim of putting in place, from healthcare professionals and health services, the necessary supports adapted to these. Mental health nurses are well‐positioned to offer support and guidance during the process of involvement and shared decision‐making. Introduction An essential aspect of mental health treatment and recovery is the degree of involvement by health service users in the process. Aim/Question Explore the values, demands and preferences of persons diagnosed with anxiety disorders, their participation in the treatment provided, and the response of the health system in this regard. Methods A qualitative study was conducted, with 51 participants. Nine focus groups and four in‐depth interviews took place. Results Three broad categories were identified: (1) diagnosis; (2) treatment options offered and shared decision‐making; and (3) coping with the disorder. Sometimes patients do not receive enough information to cover their needs. A trend towards drug prescription as a first approach was observed, while active coping based on exposure to anxiogenic situations was indicated as the most effective option. Conclusion Shared decision‐making is a necessary aspect of treatment, and the therapeutic process should be adapted to match the service user's preferences, values and needs. Implications for the Practice This research identifies the needs of patients diagnosed with anxiety disorders and promotes, therefore, from healthcare professionals and services, the provision of measures to meet these needs.

Bridging Gaps in Shared Decision‐Making for Anxiety Disorders: A Commentary on Villena et al.

The impact of shared decision-making on the treatment of anxiety and depressive disorders: systematic review

Users remain overlooked: Shared decision‐making processes for people with anxiety disorders

Shared decision‐making and social science: A patient perspective

Experiences and perspectives related to shared decision-making among outpatients with degenerative joint disease in Taiwan: a qualitative study

Shared decision-making in the treatment of bipolar disorder: findings from a nationwide naturalistic cohort study in everyday clinical practice

Shared decision making for anticoagulation reduces anxiety and improves adherence in patients with atrial fibrillation

Shared Decision Making in Primary Care Based Depression Treatment: Communication and Decision-Making Preferences Among an Underserved Patient Population

A retrospective study of differences in patients’ anxiety and satisfaction between paper-based and computer-based tools for “Shared Decision-Making”

Recent advances in the study of the comorbidity of depressive and anxiety disorders.

Shared decision-making for youth psychotherapy: A preliminary randomized clinical trial on facilitating personalized treatment.

Behaviour, Barriers and Facilitators of Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer Surgical Treatment: A Qualitative Systematic Review Using a ‘best Fit’ Framework Approach

Patient Characteristics and the Extent to Which Clinicians Involve Patients in Decision Making: Secondary Analyses of Pooled Data

Factors influencing patients’ preferences and perceived involvement in shared decision-making in mental health care

Shared decision-making in underserved populations with multiple sclerosis: A systematic review

JACC: Advances Expert Panel Perspective: Shared Decision-Making in Multidisciplinary Team-Based Cardiovascular Care

Anxiety Disorders: The Relationship between Insight and Metacognition

The Current Status and Expectation of Shared-decision Making in Chinese Patients with Cardiolvascular Diseases

Insights for Healthcare Providers on Shared Decision-Making in Multiple Sclerosis: A Narrative Review

Factors Influencing the Participation of Shared Decision Making in Stable Coronary Artery Disease Patient: Protocol of a Mixed Methods Study

The experience of shared decision‐making for people with asthma: A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies