Peter D Coxeter1, Chris B Del Mar1, Tammy C Hoffmann2. 1. Centre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Bond University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia. 2. Centre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Bond University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia. thoffmann@bond.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Childhood acute respiratory infections (ARIs) are one of the most common reasons for primary care consultations and for receiving an antibiotic. Public awareness of antibiotic benefit and harms for these conditions is low. To facilitate informed decision making, ideally in collaboration with their doctor, parents need clear communication about benefits and harms. Decision aids may be able to facilitate this process. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of three decision aids about antibiotic use for common ARIs in children. METHODS:Adult parents of children aged 1-16 years (n = 120) were recruited from community settings and then randomised using a computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive a decision aid (n = 60) or fact sheet (n = 60). Allocation was concealed and used sealed and opaque sequentially numbered envelopes. Participants self-completed questionnaires at baseline and immediately post-intervention. The primary outcome was informed choice (conceptual and numerical knowledge; attitudes towards, and intention to use, antibiotics for a future ARI). Secondary outcomes were decisional conflict, decisional self-efficacy, and material acceptability. RESULTS: After reading the information, significantly more intervention group participants made an informed choice [57%] compared with control group participants [29%] [difference 28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 11-45%, p < 0.01], and had higher total knowledge [mean difference (MD) 2.8, 95% CI 2.2-3.5, p < 0.01], conceptual knowledge (MD 0.7, 95% CI 0.4-1.1, p < 0.01) and numerical knowledge (MD 2.1, 95% CI 1.6-2.5, p < 0.01). Between-group differences in attitudes or intention to use antibiotics were not significant. Most intervention group participants found the information understandable and liked the aids' format and features. CONCLUSION: The decision aids prepared parents to make an informed choice about antibiotic use more than fact sheets, in a hypothetical situation. Their effect within a consultation needs to be evaluated. Clinical Trials Registration Number: ACTRN12615000843550.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Childhood acute respiratory infections (ARIs) are one of the most common reasons for primary care consultations and for receiving an antibiotic. Public awareness of antibiotic benefit and harms for these conditions is low. To facilitate informed decision making, ideally in collaboration with their doctor, parents need clear communication about benefits and harms. Decision aids may be able to facilitate this process. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of three decision aids about antibiotic use for common ARIs in children. METHODS: Adult parents of children aged 1-16 years (n = 120) were recruited from community settings and then randomised using a computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive a decision aid (n = 60) or fact sheet (n = 60). Allocation was concealed and used sealed and opaque sequentially numbered envelopes. Participants self-completed questionnaires at baseline and immediately post-intervention. The primary outcome was informed choice (conceptual and numerical knowledge; attitudes towards, and intention to use, antibiotics for a future ARI). Secondary outcomes were decisional conflict, decisional self-efficacy, and material acceptability. RESULTS: After reading the information, significantly more intervention group participants made an informed choice [57%] compared with control group participants [29%] [difference 28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 11-45%, p < 0.01], and had higher total knowledge [mean difference (MD) 2.8, 95% CI 2.2-3.5, p < 0.01], conceptual knowledge (MD 0.7, 95% CI 0.4-1.1, p < 0.01) and numerical knowledge (MD 2.1, 95% CI 1.6-2.5, p < 0.01). Between-group differences in attitudes or intention to use antibiotics were not significant. Most intervention group participants found the information understandable and liked the aids' format and features. CONCLUSION: The decision aids prepared parents to make an informed choice about antibiotic use more than fact sheets, in a hypothetical situation. Their effect within a consultation needs to be evaluated. Clinical Trials Registration Number: ACTRN12615000843550.
Authors: Ruby Biezen; Allan J Pollack; Christopher Harrison; Bianca Brijnath; Danilla Grando; Helena C Britt; Danielle Mazza Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2015-03-16 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Roderick P Venekamp; Sharon L Sanders; Paul P Glasziou; Chris B Del Mar; Maroeska M Rovers Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2015-06-23
Authors: Tammy C Hoffmann; Mark Jones; Paul Glasziou; Elaine Beller; Lyndal Trevena; Chris Del Mar Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2022 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Ellen A Lipstein; Jason P Block; Cassandra Dodds; Christopher B Forrest; William J Heerman; J Kiely Law; Douglas Lunsford; Paula Winkler; Jonathan A Finkelstein Journal: Clin Pediatr (Phila) Date: 2018-10-26 Impact factor: 1.168