Background: There are a variety of different treatments for patients living with subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS). All treatments have small to moderate effect sizes, and it is challenging when healthcare practitioners and patients need to decide on which treatment options to choose. The aim of this study was to explore and understand the decisional needs of patients with SAPS, to inform and support the decision-making process. Methods: A qualitative research study, using semi-structured individual interviews with patients with SAPS. The interview guide was informed by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF), previous research related to treatment decision-making, other decisional needs assessment studies, and inputs from patients with SAPS and healthcare practitioners. Data were analysed by using reflexive thematic text analysis and ODSF. The analysis was conducted in NVivo 12. Results: We invited 22 participants of which 17 (age 22-71 years) took part in the study. We found three main themes related to individual decisional needs in the context of decision-making: 1) The necessity of certainty and adequate information as fundamental prerequisites for effective decision-making, 2) The importance of person-centred care to achieve a desirable decision, and 3) The need for a supportive environment to facilitate adaptation and acceptance of the decision. Conclusion: The decision-making process faced by patients with SAPS is complex and involves several decisional needs. Our findings highlight the importance of healthcare professionals identifying and addressing patients decisional needs in consultations with patients with SAPS. Implications: Our study provides guidance to clinical practice in terms of increased understanding of the decisional needs experienced by patients with SAPS. Furthermore, these results should inform future development of decision aids for patients with SAPS. Keywords: subacromial pain syndrome; qualitative interviews; decisional needs; decision-making.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

https://osf.io/d4bfg/

SCB is funded by through an undergraduate Scholarships from Novo Nordisk Foundation. KDL is funded through TrygFonden (ID: 1524959), Danish Association of Physiotherapy and Aalborg University. NEF is funded through an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Investigator Grant (ID: 2018182). JRZ is funded through an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Investigator Grant (ID: APP1194105).

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The study was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration and was deemed exempt from full ethical approval by The North Denmark Region Committee on Health Research Ethics (2023-000206).

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

Due to the nature of the research supporting data is not available to be publicly.