Literature DB >> 25041071

The impact of DECISION+2 on patient intention to engage in shared decision making: secondary analysis of a multicentre clustered randomized trial.

Nicolas Couët1,2, Michel Labrecque3,2, Hubert Robitaille2, Stéphane Turcotte2, France Légaré3,2,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Training health professionals in shared decision making (SDM) may influence their patients' intention to engage in SDM.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of DECISION+2, a SDM training programme for family physicians about the use of antibiotics to treat acute respiratory infections (ARIs), on their patients' intention to engage in SDM in future consultations.
DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a multicentre clustered randomized trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred and fifty-nine patients consulting family physicians about an ARI in nine family practice teaching units (FPTUs). INTERVENTION: DECISION+2 (two-hour online tutorial, two-hour workshop, and decision support tools) was offered in the experimental group (five FPTUs, 162 physicians, 181 patients). Usual care was provided in the control group (four FPTUs, 108 physicians, 178 patients). OUTCOME MEASURE: Change in patients' intention scores (range -3 to +3) between pre- and post-consultation.
RESULTS: The mean ± SD [median] scores of intention to engage in SDM were high in both study groups before consultation (DECISION+2 group: 1.4 ± 1.0 [1.7]; control group: 1.5 ± 1.1 [1.7]) and increased in both groups after consultation (DECISION+2 group: 2.1 ± 1.1 [2.7]; control group: 1.9 ± 1.2 [2.3]). Change of intention, classified as either increased, stable or decreased, was not statistically associated with the exposure to the DECISION+2 programme after adjusting for the cluster design (proportional odds ratio = 1.5; 95% confidence interval = 0.8-3.0).
CONCLUSION: DECISION+2 had no significant impact on patients' intention to engage in SDM for choosing to use antibiotics or not to treat an ARI in future consultations. Patient-targeted interventions may be necessary to achieve this purpose.
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinician-patient communication; implementation; patient involvement in decision making; shared decision making; theory of planned behaviour

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25041071      PMCID: PMC5810737          DOI: 10.1111/hex.12235

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  28 in total

1.  Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model.

Authors:  C Charles; A Gafni; T Whelan
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.634

2.  Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: a meta-analytic review.

Authors:  C J Armitage; M Conner
Journal:  Br J Soc Psychol       Date:  2001-12

3.  Quality of life scores differed according to mode of administration in a review of three major oncology questionnaires.

Authors:  Yin Bun Cheung; Cynthia Goh; Julian Thumboo; Kei-Siong Khoo; Joseph Wee
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Patient and provider perspectives on shared decision making: a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature.

Authors:  Nyna Williams; Chris Fleming; Annie Doubleday
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2017-11-17       Impact factor: 1.744

5.  Prenatal screening for Down syndrome: a survey of willingness in women and family physicians to engage in shared decision-making.

Authors:  France Légaré; Sylvie St-Jacques; Susie Gagnon; Merlin Njoya; Michel Brisson; Pierre Frémont; François Rousseau
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 3.050

6.  Which survey questions change behavior? Randomized controlled trial of mere measurement interventions.

Authors:  Gaston Godin; Paschal Sheeran; Mark Conner; Gilles Delage; Marc Germain; Ariane Bélanger-Gravel; Herminé Naccache
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.267

Review 7.  Patient preferences for shared decisions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Betty Chewning; Carma L Bylund; Bupendra Shah; Neeraj K Arora; Jennifer A Gueguen; Gregory Makoul
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2011-04-06

8.  Phone respondents reported less mental health problems whereas mail interviewee gave higher physical health ratings.

Authors:  Ulrike Ravens-Sieberer; Michael Erhart; Ralf Wetzel; André Krügel; Anett Brambosch
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2008-06-06       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  Effects of phone versus mail survey methods on the measurement of health-related quality of life and emotional and behavioural problems in adolescents.

Authors:  Michael Erhart; Ralf M Wetzel; André Krügel; Ulrike Ravens-Sieberer
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-12-30       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Healthcare providers' intentions to engage in an interprofessional approach to shared decision-making in home care programs: a mixed methods study.

Authors:  France Légaré; Dawn Stacey; Nathalie Brière; Kimberley Fraser; Sophie Desroches; Serge Dumont; Anne Sales; Carole Puma; Denise Aubé
Journal:  J Interprof Care       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 2.338

View more
  4 in total

1.  Preparing Parents to Make An Informed Choice About Antibiotic Use for Common Acute Respiratory Infections in Children: A Randomised Trial of Brief Decision Aids in a Hypothetical Scenario.

Authors:  Peter D Coxeter; Chris B Del Mar; Tammy C Hoffmann
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Health Professions Digital Education on Antibiotic Management: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration.

Authors:  Bhone Myint Kyaw; Lorainne Tudor Car; Louise Sandra van Galen; Michiel A van Agtmael; Céire E Costelloe; Onyema Ajuebor; James Campbell; Josip Car
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2019-09-12       Impact factor: 5.428

3.  Evaluation of the Choosing Wisely Australia 5 Questions resource and a shared decision-making preparation video: protocol for an online experiment.

Authors:  Danielle Marie Muscat; Edward Hoi-Fan Chang; Rachel Thompson; Erin Cvejic; Marguerite Tracy; Joshua Zadro; Jessica Kathleen Smith; Robyn Lindner; Kirsten McCaffery
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Role competency scale on shared decision-making nurses: Development and psychometric properties.

Authors:  Joseph D Tariman; Pamela Katz; Jessica Bishop-Royse; Lisa Hartle; Katharine L Szubski; Toreend Enecio; Ima Garcia; Nadia Spawn; Katherine Jones Masterton
Journal:  SAGE Open Med       Date:  2018-10-17
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.