Literature DB >> 19605885

Should clinicians deliver decision aids? Further exploration of the statin choice randomized trial results.

Lesley A Jones1, Audrey J Weymiller, Nilay Shah, Sandra C Bryant, Teresa J H Christianson, Gordon H Guyatt, Amiram Gafni, Steven A Smith, Victor M Montori.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Statin Choice is a decision aid about taking statins. The optimal mode of delivering Statin Choice (or any other decision aid) in clinical practice is unknown.
METHODS: To investigate the effect of mode of delivery on decision aid efficacy, the authors further explored the results of a concealed 2 x 2 factorial clustered randomized trial enrolling 21 endocrinologists and 98 diabetes patients and randomizing them to 1) receive either the decision aid or pamphlet about cholesterol, and 2) have these delivered either during the office visit (by the clinician) or before the visit (by a researcher). We estimated between-group differences and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for acceptability of information delivery (1-7), knowledge about statins and coronary risk (0-9), and decisional conflict about statin use (0-100) assessed immediately after the visit. Follow-up was 99%.
RESULTS: The relative efficacy of the decision aid v. pamphlet interacted with the mode of delivery. Compared with the pamphlet, patients whose clinicians delivered the decision aid during the office visit showed significant improvements in knowledge (difference of 1.6 of 9 questions, CI 0.3, 2.8) and nonsignificant trends toward finding the decision aid more acceptable (odds ratio 3.1, CI 0.9, 11.2) and having less decisional conflict (difference of 7 of 100 points, CI -4, 18) than when a researcher delivered the decision aid just before the office visit.
CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of decision aids by clinicians during the visit improves knowledge and shows a trend toward better acceptability and less decisional conflict.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19605885     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X09333120

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  22 in total

1.  Insights from a conference on implementing comparative effectiveness research through shared decision-making.

Authors:  Mary C Politi; Marla L Clayman; Angela Fagerlin; Jamie L Studts; Victor Montori
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 1.744

Review 2.  Risk scoring for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Kunal N Karmali; Stephen D Persell; Pablo Perel; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Mark A Berendsen; Mark D Huffman
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-03-14

3.  Balance Sheets Versus Decision Dashboards to Support Patient Treatment Choices: A Comparative Analysis.

Authors:  James G Dolan; Peter J Veazie
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  The Chest Pain Choice trial: a pilot randomized trial of a decision aid for patients with chest pain in the emergency department.

Authors:  Meghan A Pierce; Erik P Hess; Jeffrey A Kline; Nilay D Shah; Maggie Breslin; Megan E Branda; Laurie J Pencille; Brent R Asplin; David M Nestler; Annie T Sadosty; Ian G Stiell; Henry H Ting; Victor M Montori
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2010-05-17       Impact factor: 2.279

5.  'They leave at least believing they had a part in the discussion': understanding decision aid use and patient-clinician decision-making through qualitative research.

Authors:  Kristina Tiedje; Nathan D Shippee; Anna M Johnson; Priscilla M Flynn; Dawn M Finnie; Juliette T Liesinger; Carl R May; Marianne E Olson; Jennifer L Ridgeway; Nilay D Shah; Barbara P Yawn; Victor M Montori
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2013-04-15

Review 6.  Interventions for increasing the use of shared decision making by healthcare professionals.

Authors:  France Légaré; Rhéda Adekpedjou; Dawn Stacey; Stéphane Turcotte; Jennifer Kryworuchko; Ian D Graham; Anne Lyddiatt; Mary C Politi; Richard Thomson; Glyn Elwyn; Norbert Donner-Banzhoff
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-07-19

7.  Impact of an interprofessional shared decision-making and goal-setting decision aid for patients with diabetes on decisional conflict--study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Catherine H Yu; Noah M Ivers; Dawn Stacey; Jeremy Rezmovitz; Deanna Telner; Kevin Thorpe; Susan Hall; Marc Settino; David M Kaplan; Michael Coons; Sumeet Sodhi; Joanna Sale; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2015-06-27       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Designing and evaluating an interprofessional shared decision-making and goal-setting decision aid for patients with diabetes in clinical care--systematic decision aid development and study protocol.

Authors:  Catherine H Yu; Dawn Stacey; Joanna Sale; Susan Hall; David M Kaplan; Noah Ivers; Jeremy Rezmovitz; Fok-Han Leung; Baiju R Shah; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 7.327

9.  Protocol for the Osteoporosis Choice trial. A pilot randomized trial of a decision aid in primary care practice.

Authors:  Laurie J Pencille; Megan E Campbell; Holly K Van Houten; Nilay D Shah; Rebecca J Mullan; Brian A Swiglo; Maggie Breslin; Rebecca L Kesman; Sidna M Tulledge-Scheitel; Thomas M Jaeger; Ruth E Johnson; Gregory A Bartel; Robert A Wermers; L Joseph Melton; Victor M Montori
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-12-10       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 10.  Coaching and guidance with patient decision aids: A review of theoretical and empirical evidence.

Authors:  Dawn Stacey; Jennifer Kryworuchko; Jeff Belkora; B Joyce Davison; Marie-Anne Durand; Karen B Eden; Aubri S Hoffman; Mirjam Koerner; France Légaré; Marie-Chantal Loiselle; Richard L Street
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2013-11-29       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.