Abstract 162: Does a Telehealth “Virtual Consult” Including Referring Physicians, Specialist Physicians and Patients Increase Shared Decision Making for Patients With Heart Disease?

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Coylewright ◽  
Ariel Sherman ◽  
Stuart W Grande ◽  
Keren Xu ◽  
John Kirk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Fisher Exact Test ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Specialist Physician ◽  
Referring Physicians ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Strong Agreement

Background: Shared decision making (SDM) is highly recommended but difficult to implement for patients with severe heart disease referred for cardiac intervention. This study utilized telehealth (TH) to bring referring physicians and their patients together with a specialist physician to exchange treatment options and patient preferences via a triadic “virtual consult”. This study explores the impact of this innovative approach on SDM and patient decisional conflict. Methods: Two cohorts were included: usual care (UC) and TH. UC patients were seen in a clinic with one of 4 participating physicians, and visits were recorded. Telehealth patients met with their local referring physician in the office, and connected remotely with the specialist physician. One of two decision aids (DA) was used: HealthDecision, an electronic health record-integrated DA for atrial fibrillation, or AS Choice, a paper-based DA for severe aortic stenosis. Patient characteristics were collected via surveys. SDM was measured via Observer OPTION-5, a tool used to rate audio or video-taped clinical encounters, with raters’ agreement being assessed by the Bland-Altman analysis (2-rater pairs). Decisional conflict was measured by a 4-item survey, SURE. Data from two cohorts were compared using the Fisher exact test and the Student’s t test. Results: Twenty UC visits (5 per physician) were compared with 7 telehealth visits from 4 clinical sites. Patient mean age was 84.3 years and 52% were women. UC patients were older than telehealth patients (87.6 vs. 74.9, p=0.002). Patient decisional conflict was significantly different between the two groups (p=0.02). Telehealth visits had higher OPTION-5 scores than UC visits (99.3 vs. 19.0, p<0.001). (Figure) Rater pairs were used for each observation with evidence of lack of strong agreement in 2 pairs (95% limits of agreement in 3 pairs: [-6.0, 8.8], n=7; [-24.3, 20.7], n=11; [-34.2, 18.7], n=9). Conclusions: A combined clinical visit with both the referring and specialist physicians, along with their patient in a “virtual consult,” led to decreased patient decisional conflict. Higher OPTION-5 scores were suggested, indicating improvement in the presence of SDM; lack of strong agreement between raters limits this finding and larger studies are needed.

The Promise of Electronic Health Records to Promote Shared Decision Making: A Narrative Review and a Look Ahead

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (8) ◽  
pp. 1040-1045 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alyce Mei-Shiuan Kuo ◽  
Berry Thavalathil ◽  
Glyn Elwyn ◽  
Zsuzsanna Nemeth ◽  
Stuti Dang
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Electronic Health Records ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Health Records ◽  
Look Ahead ◽  
The Face ◽  
Electronic Health ◽  
The Impact

Background. Shared decision making (SDM) involves the sharing of best available evidence between patients and providers in the face of difficult decisions. We examine outcomes that occur when electronic health records (EHRs) are purposefully used with the goal of improving SDM and detail which EHR functions can benefit SDM. Methods. A systematic search of PubMed yielded 1369 articles. Studies were included only if they used EHR interventions to support SDM and included results that showed impact on SDM. Articles were excluded if they did not measure the impact of the intervention on SDM or did not discuss how SDM had been supported by the EHR. Results. Five studies demonstrated improved clinical outcomes, positive lifestyle behavior changes, more deliberation from patients regarding use of imaging, and less decisional conflict about medication use among patients with use of EHRs aiding SDM. Discussion. Few EHRs have integrated SDM, and even fewer evaluations of these exist. EHRs have potential in supporting providers during all steps of SDM. The promise of EHRs to support SDM has yet to be fully exploited.

scholarly journals Shared Decision Making in Surgery: A Meta-Analysis and Full Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 59
Author(s):  
Kacper Niburski ◽  
Elena Guadagno ◽  
Dan Poenaru
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Medical Librarian ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Impact

Shared decision-making (SDM), the process where physician and patient reach an agreed-upon choice by understanding the values, concerns, and preferences inherent within each treatment option available, has been increasingly implemented in clinical practice to better health care outcomes. Despite the proven efficacy of SDM to provide better patient-guided care in medicine, its use in surgery has not been studied widely. A search strategy was developed with a medical librarian. It included nine databases from inception until December 2018. After a 2-person title and abstract screen, full-text publications were analyzed in detail. A meta-analysis was done to quantify the impact of SDM in surgical specialties. In total 5,596 studies were retrieved. After duplicates were removed, titles and abstracts were screened, and p-values were recorded, 140 (45 RCTs and 95 cross-sectional studies) were used for the systematic review and 42 for the meta-analyses. Most of the studies noted decreased intervention rate (8 of 14), decisional conflict (13 of 16), and decisional regret (3 of 3), and an increased decisional satisfaction (9 of 12), knowledge (19 of 20), SDM preference (6 of 8), and physician trust (3 of 4) when using SDM. Time increase per patient encounter was inconclusive. The meta-analysis showed that despite high heterogeneity, the results were significant. Far from obviating surgical immediacy, these results suggest that SDM is vital for the best indicators of care. With decreased conflict and anxiety, increasing knowledge and satisfaction, and creating a more whole, trusting relationship, SDM appears to be beneficial in surgery.

Abstract 202: A Pilot Study to Evaluate the Impact of Decision Aid Timing on Mandatory Shared Decision Making for Defibrillator Implantation

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Birju Rao ◽  
Neal W Dickert ◽  
David Howard ◽  
Dan D Matlock ◽  
Leon Darghosian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Implementation Strategy ◽  
Office Visit ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Icd Implantation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
To Receive

Background: In 2018, CMS required shared decision-making (SDM) with a decision (DA) prior to implantation of a primary prevention cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Little is known about how DAs should be incorporated, but the implementation strategy may affect the process. Providing DAs prior to the SDM visit may facilitate informed discussion. However, this requires identifying ICD candidates ahead of time which may be logistically challenging. Providing the DA during the office visit requires less administrative effort but may reduce the impact of the DA. Objective: To evaluate the impact of DA timing on SDM outcomes. Methods: Patients referred for ICD implantation were block randomized across 3 clinics to receive the DA 30 minutes prior to, or at the end of the SDM visit. Patients were surveyed on implant day in several SDM domains including knowledge about ICDs, decisional conflict, values-choice concordance and the extent to which patients felt engaged in the decision-making process. Patients who chose not to have an ICD implanted after the SDM visit were surveyed by mail. Implanting physicians were also surveyed to assess perceptions about the impact of the DA. Results: Of 42 randomized patients, 24 completed the survey with 9 who received the DA before and 15 after the SDM visit. Three chose not to have an ICD implanted: 1 received the DA before and 2 after the visit. Though overall knowledge about ICDs was similar between groups (Table), every patient who received the DA before the encounter understood the primary purpose of the ICD, compared with 10/15 who received the DA after the visit. Receiving the DA earlier showed a numerically higher rate of understanding the risk of inappropriate ICD shocks. No significant differences were observed in decisional conflict, values-choice concordance, or reported patient engagement in decision-making. Conclusion: Patients who received a DA prior to the visit had numerically, but not significantly, higher rates of understanding the purpose of the ICD and risk of inappropriate shocks. These pilot data suggest that efforts to provide DAs ahead of time may strengthen SDM interaction and that an implementation strategy is critical to study. Important knowledge gaps remain in both groups, suggesting opportunities to improve SDM for ICDs.

Abstract 182: Shared Decision-Making Results in Knowledge Transfer Across Diverse Patient Subgroups: An Encounter-Level Meta-Analysis of Decision Aid Trials

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Coylewright ◽  
Megan E Branda ◽  
Nilay D Shah ◽  
Erik P Hess ◽  
Annie LeBlanc ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Knowledge Transfer ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Formal Education ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Decision Aids ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Patient Subgroups

Background: Shared decision-making with decision aids (DA) improves patient knowledge and reduces decisional conflict. The extent to which they do so across sociodemographic subgroups remains unknown. Methods: An encounter-level meta-analysis of five DA randomized trials examined the impact of sociodemographic variables on knowledge transfer and decisional conflict using a generalized linear model stratified by study and adjusted by treatment arm. Results: We analyzed 595 patient-clinician encounters. Significantly higher knowledge transfer with DA occurred in nearly all patient subgroups when compared to usual care (UC). Patients with more formal education tended to have greater knowledge transfer with UC; this was diminished with DA. There was a trend towards improved decisional conflict in all subgroups with the use of DA; overall decisional conflict was low. (see Table) Conclusion: The use of DA compared to UC significantly increases knowledge transfer across diverse subgroups and there is a tendency towards reduced decisional conflict. Differences at baseline, such as knowledge transfer across educational strata, may be mitigated with use of DA. In conclusion, DA are found to be effective across patient subgroups and may represent a novel strategy to lessen disparities.

OP126 Shared Decision-Making Influences Patients’ Adoption Of Stents In China

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (S1) ◽  
pp. 48-49
Author(s):  
Jian Ming ◽  
Yan Wei ◽  
Yingyao Chen ◽  
Jiayan Huang
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Patients Satisfaction ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The Impact

Introduction:Shared decision-making (SDM) is an essential component of patient-centered care, involving communication and discussions between physicians and patients on various options to meet their health needs. This study examines the current situation of patients’ participation in decision-making in relation to the clinical application of drug-eluting stents (DES). Further, the impact of patients’ involvement in decision-making on patients' adoption of DES was analyzed, with a view to providing research outcomes to guide clinical practice.Methods:A cross-sectional study was conducted from July to December 2016 in selected hospitals in Fujian Province, Sichuan Province, and Shanghai in China. Patients with coronary heart disease completed a survey, which contained the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) about satisfaction with decision-making processes, and questions on DES. Data were analyzed with cluster analysis, correlation analysis, multivariate logistic regression, and multivariate linear regression.Results:One hundred and seventy-nine patients with coronary heart disease from 15 hospitals in the three regions completed the questionnaire. There were good validity and reliability for SDM-Q-9, with Cronbach's alpha as 0.96 and intra-class correlations 0.59–0.79 (all P < 0.01). Among these respondents, 42.1 percent adopted DES, 83.4 percent were supportive of SDM and 61.33 percent thought they had better communication with physicians regarding decision-making. Patients’ level of SDM involvement was found to be positively associated with their satisfaction with the decision-making process (P < 0.001) and their adoption of DES (P < 0.05). Also, satisfaction with shared decision-making regarding treatment was positively associated with adoption of DES (P < 0.001).Conclusions:Most of the patients with coronary heart disease preferred SDM, and SDM was found to be an important predictor of patients’ satisfaction with decision-making processes and adoption of DES. Better communication between physicians and patients is needed in order to improve patients’ satisfaction and promote the appropriate use of DES technology in China.

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

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.

scholarly journals Development of an electronic conversation aid to support shared decision making for children with acute otitis media

JAMIA Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jana L Anderson ◽  
e Silva Lucas Oliveira J ◽  
Juan P Brito ◽  
Ian G Hargraves ◽  
Erik P Hess
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Otitis Media ◽  
Acute Otitis Media ◽  
Medical Knowledge ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Quality Issue ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Objective The overuse of antibiotics for acute otitis media (AOM) in children is a healthcare quality issue in part arising from conflicting parent and physician understanding of the risks and benefits of antibiotics for AOM. Our objective was to develop a conversation aid that supports shared decision making (SDM) with parents of children who are diagnosed with non-severe AOM in the acute care setting. Materials and Methods We developed a web-based encounter tool following a human-centered design approach that includes active collaboration with parents, clinicians, and designers using literature review, observations of clinical encounters, parental and clinician surveys, and interviews. Insights from these processes informed the iterative creation of prototypes that were reviewed and field-tested in patient encounters. Results The ear pain conversation aid includes five sections: (1) A home page that opens the discussion on the etiologies of AOM; (2) the various options available for AOM management; (3) a pictograph of the impact of antibiotic therapy on pain control; (4) a pictograph of complication rates with and without antibiotics; and (5) a summary page on management choices. This open-access, web-based tool is located at www.earpaindecisionaid.org. Conclusions We collaboratively developed an evidence-based conversation aid to facilitate SDM for AOM. This decision aid has the potential to improve parental medical knowledge of AOM, physician/parent communication, and possibly decrease the overuse of antibiotics for this condition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document