Shared Decision Making for Syncope in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Feasibility Trial

BACKGROUND Interventions to involve parents in decisions regarding children’s and young people’s mental health are associated with positive outcomes. However, appropriately planning effectiveness studies is critical to ensure that meaningful evidence is collected. It is important to conduct pilot studies to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention itself and the feasibility of the protocol to test effectiveness. OBJECTIVE This paper reports the findings from a feasibility and acceptability study of Power Up for Parents, an intervention to promote shared decision-making (SDM) and support parents and caregivers making decisions regarding children’s and young people’s mental health. METHODS A mixed method study design was adopted. In stage 1, health care professionals and parents provided feedback on acceptability, usefulness, and suggestions for further development. Stage 2 was a multicenter, 3-arm, individual, and cluster randomized controlled pilot feasibility trial with parents accessing services related to children’s and young people’s mental health. Outcome measures collected data on demographics, participation rates, SDM, satisfaction, and parents’ anxiety. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Google Analytics estimates were used to report engagement with the prototype. Outcomes from both stages were tested against a published set of criteria for proceeding to a randomized controlled trial. RESULTS Despite evidence suggesting the acceptability of Power Up for Parents, the findings suggest that recruitment modifications are needed to enhance the feasibility of collecting follow-up data before scaling up to a fully powered randomized controlled trial. On the basis of the Go or No-Go criteria, only 50% (6/12) of the sites successfully recruited participants, and only 38% (16/42) of parents completed follow-up measures. Nonetheless, health care practitioners and parents generally accessed and used the intervention. Themes describing <i>appearance and functionality, perceived need and general helpfulness, accessibility and appropriateness,</i> and <i>a wish list for improvement</i> emerged, providing valuable information to inform future development and refinement of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS Owing to the high attrition observed in the trial, proceeding directly to a full randomized controlled trial may not be feasible with this recruitment strategy. Nonetheless, with some minor adjustments and upgrades to the intervention, this pilot study provides a platform for future evaluations of Power Up for Parents. CLINICALTRIAL International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 39238984; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN39238984. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-10.2196/14571

Download Full-text

The impact of patient narratives on medical students’ perceptions of shared decision making: A randomized controlled trial

10.31234/osf.io/f84cq ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Martina Bientzle ◽

Marie Eggeling ◽

Simone Korger ◽

Joachim Kimmerle

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Medical Students ◽

Shared Decision Making ◽

Medical Training ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Future Research ◽

Shared Decision ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Information Text ◽

The Impact

BACKGROUND: Successful shared decision making (SDM) in clinical practice requires that future clinicians learn to appreciate the value of patient participation as early as in their medical training. Narratives, such as patient testimonials, have been successfully used to support patients’ decision-making process. Previous research suggests that narratives may also be used for increasing clinicians’ empathy and responsiveness in medical consultations. However, so far, no studies have investigated the benefits of narratives for conveying the relevance of SDM to medical students.METHODS: In this randomized controlled experiment, N = 167 medical students were put into a scenario where they prepared for medical consultation with a patient having Parkinson disease. After receiving general information, participants read either a narrative patient testimonial or a fact-based information text. We measured their perceptions of SDM, their control preferences (i.e., their priorities as to who should make the decision), and the time they intended to spend for the consultation.RESULTS: Participants in the narrative patient testimonial condition referred more strongly to the patient as the one who should make decisions than participants who read the information text. Participants who read the patient narrative also considered SDM in situations with more than one treatment option to be more important than participants in the information text condition. There were no group differences regarding their control preferences. Participants who read the patient testimonial indicated that they would schedule more time for the consultation.CONCLUSIONS: These findings show that narratives can potentially be useful for imparting the relevance of SDM and patient-centered values to medical students. We discuss possible causes of this effect and implications for training and future research.

Download Full-text