Literature DB >> 17545350

A patient decision aid to support shared decision-making on anti-thrombotic treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation: randomised controlled trial.

Richard G Thomson1, Martin P Eccles, I Nick Steen, Jane Greenaway, Lynne Stobbart, Madeleine J Murtagh, Carl R May.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of a computerised decision aid in patients with atrial fibrillation making decisions on whether to take warfarin or aspirin therapy.
DESIGN: Two-armed open exploratory randomised controlled trial.
SETTING: Two research clinics deriving participants from general practices in Northeast England. PARTICIPANTS: 109 patients with atrial fibrillation aged over 60.
INTERVENTIONS: Computerised decision aid applied in shared decision-making clinic compared to evidence-based paper guidelines applied as direct advice. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was the decision conflict scale. Secondary outcome measures included anxiety, knowledge, decision-making preference, treatment decision, use of primary and secondary care services and health outcomes.
RESULTS: Decision conflict was lower in the computerised decision aid group immediately after the clinic; mean difference -0.18 (95% CI -0.34 to -0.01). Participants in this group not already on warfarin were much less likely to start warfarin than those in the guidelines arm (4/16, 25% compared to the guidelines group 15/16, 93.8%, RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.63).
CONCLUSIONS: Decision conflict was lower immediately following the use of a computerised decision aid in a shared decision-making consultation than immediately following direct doctor-led advice based on paper guidelines. Furthermore, participants in the computerised decision aid group were significantly much less likely to start warfarin than those in the guidelines arm. The results show that such an approach has a positive impact on decision conflict comparable to other studies of decision aids, but also reduces the uptake of a clinically effective treatment that may have important implications for health outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17545350      PMCID: PMC2464985          DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2006.018481

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care        ISSN: 1475-3898


  21 in total

1.  Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: a systematic review of rigorous evaluations.

Authors:  J M Grimshaw; I T Russell
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1993-11-27       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  The impact of patients' preferences on the treatment of atrial fibrillation: observational study of patient based decision analysis.

Authors:  J Protheroe; T Fahey; A A Montgomery; T J Peters
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-05-20

Review 3.  The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments.

Authors:  A J Lloyd
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2001-09

4.  A patient decision aid regarding antithrombotic therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  M Man-Son-Hing; A Laupacis; A M O'Connor; J Biggs; E Drake; E Yetisir; R G Hart
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-08-25       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Decision analysis and guidelines for anticoagulant therapy to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  R Thomson; D Parkin; M Eccles; M Sudlow; A Robinson
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-03-18       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Prevalence of atrial fibrillation and eligibility for anticoagulants in the community.

Authors:  M Sudlow; R Thomson; B Thwaites; H Rodgers; R A Kenny
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-10-10       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Development and description of a decision analysis based decision support tool for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  Richard Thomson; Angela Robinson; Jane Greenaway; Philip Lowe
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2002-03

8.  Decision making during serious illness: what role do patients really want to play?

Authors:  L F Degner; J A Sloan
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  The effect of qualitative vs. quantitative presentation of probability estimates on patient decision-making: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Malcolm Man-Son-Hing; Annette M O'Connor; Elizabeth Drake; Jennifer Biggs; Valerie Hum; Andreas Laupacis
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Qualitative methods in a randomised controlled trial: the role of an integrated qualitative process evaluation in providing evidence to discontinue the intervention in one arm of a trial of a decision support tool.

Authors:  M J Murtagh; R G Thomson; C R May; T Rapley; B R Heaven; R H Graham; E F Kaner; L Stobbart; M P Eccles
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2007-06
View more
  48 in total

1.  Triaging patients at risk of influenza using a patient portal.

Authors:  S Trent Rosenbloom; Titus L Daniels; Thomas R Talbot; Taylor McClain; Robert Hennes; Shane Stenner; Sue Muse; Jim Jirjis; Gretchen Purcell Jackson
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2011-12-01       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 2.  Factors Affecting Patients' Perception On, and Adherence To, Anticoagulant Therapy: Anticipating the Role of Direct Oral Anticoagulants.

Authors:  Ekta Y Pandya; Beata Bajorek
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 3.  Patient values and preferences in decision making for antithrombotic therapy: a systematic review: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  Samantha MacLean; Sohail Mulla; Elie A Akl; Milosz Jankowski; Per Olav Vandvik; Shanil Ebrahim; Shelley McLeod; Neera Bhatnagar; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 9.410

4.  Towards Supporting Patient Decision-making In Online Diabetes Communities.

Authors:  Jing Zhang; Rebecca Marmor; Jina Huh
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2018-04-16

Review 5.  Outcome-Relevant Effects of Shared Decision Making.

Authors:  Katarina Hauser; Armin Koerfer; Kathrin Kuhr; Christian Albus; Stefan Herzig; Jan Matthes
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2015-10-02       Impact factor: 5.594

6.  Net Clinical Benefits of Guidelines and Decision Tool Recommendations for Oral Anticoagulant Use among Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Anand R Shewale; Jill T Johnson; Chenghui Li; David Nelsen; Bradley C Martin
Journal:  J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2015-10-21       Impact factor: 2.136

Review 7.  Patient-centered interventions to improve medication management and adherence: a qualitative review of research findings.

Authors:  Jennifer L Kuntz; Monika M Safford; Jasvinder A Singh; Shobha Phansalkar; Sarah P Slight; Qoua Liang Her; Nancy Allen Lapointe; Robin Mathews; Emily O'Brien; William B Brinkman; Kevin Hommel; Kevin C Farmer; Elissa Klinger; Nivethietha Maniam; Heather J Sobko; Stacy C Bailey; Insook Cho; Maureen H Rumptz; Meredith L Vandermeer; Mark C Hornbrook
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2014-09-16

8.  Values and preferences for oral antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation: physician and patient perspectives.

Authors:  Pablo Alonso-Coello; Victor M Montori; M Gloria Díaz; Philip J Devereaux; Gemma Mas; Ana I Diez; Ivan Solà; Mercè Roura; Juan C Souto; Sven Oliver; Rafael Ruiz; Blanca Coll-Vinent; Ignasi Gich; Holger J Schünemann; Gordon Guyatt
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-05-12       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 9.  Strengthening the Learning Health System in Cardiovascular Disease Prevention: Time to Leverage Big Data and Digital Solutions.

Authors:  Anjali A Wagle; Nino Isakadze; Khurram Nasir; Seth Shay Martin
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2021-03-10       Impact factor: 5.113

Review 10.  Shared decision-making and comparative effectiveness research for patients with chronic conditions: an urgent synergy for better health.

Authors:  Michael R Gionfriddo; Aaron L Leppin; Juan P Brito; Annie Leblanc; Nilay D Shah; Victor M Montori
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 1.744

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.