Development and Alpha-testing of a Stepped Decision Aid for Patients Considering Nonsurgical Options for Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis Management

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (10) ◽  
pp. 1891-1896 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karine Toupin April ◽  
Tamara Rader ◽  
Gillian A. Hawker ◽  
Dawn Stacey ◽  
Annette M. O’Connor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Aid ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Hip Osteoarthritis ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
American College Of Rheumatology ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Future Evaluation

Objective.To develop an innovative stepped patient decision aid (StDA) comparing the benefits and harms of 13 nonsurgical treatment options for managing osteoarthritis (OA) and to evaluate its acceptability and effects on informed decision making.Methods.Guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework and the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, the process involved (1) developing a decision aid with evidence on 13 nonsurgical treatments from the 2012 American College of Rheumatology OA clinical practice guidelines; and (2) interviewing patients with OA and healthcare providers to test its acceptability and effects on knowledge and decisional conflict.Results.The StDA helped make the decision explicit, and presented evidence on 13 OA treatments clustered into 5 steps or levels according to their benefits and harms. Probabilities of benefits and harms were presented using pictograms of 100 faces formatted to allow comparisons across sets of options. It also included a values clarification exercise and knowledge test. Feedback was obtained from 49 patients and 7 healthcare providers. They found that the StDA presented evidence in a clear manner, and helped patients clarify their values and make an informed decision. Some participants found that there was too much information and others said that there was not enough on each treatment option.Conclusion.This innovative StDA allows patients to consider both the evidence and their values for multiple options. The findings are being used to revise and plan future evaluation. The StDA is an example of how research evidence in guidelines can be implemented in practice.

scholarly journals 0512 Impact of a Patient Decision-Aid When Selecting Insomnia Treatments and Factors Associated with Decisional Conflict: Preliminary Findings from an Ongoing Pragmatic Clinical Trial

SLEEP ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. A196-A196
Author(s):  
J M Cheung ◽  
X Ji ◽  
H Ivers ◽  
C M Morin
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Treatment Initiation ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Pragmatic Clinical Trial ◽  
Usual Treatment ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Baseline Covariates

Abstract Introduction Preferences play an important role in determining insomnia treatment outcomes, but the validity of patient choice is rarely assessed. Uninformed preferences can lead to decisional conflict, which can negatively impact on treatment initiation, adherence, and subsequent outcomes. The current study aims to evaluate the impact of integrating a patient decision-aid as part of a pragmatic clinical trial and to identify baseline covariates associated with clinically significant decisional conflict (CSDC). Methods Secondary analysis of an ongoing pragmatic clinical trial for a two-stage cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) intervention was undertaken. Participants were referred from primary care clinics in Quebec City, Canada. Upon enrolment, participants were guided by a decision-aid, outlining the risks and benefits of prospective treatment options, when selecting their preferred arm of treatment in Phase 1. Options included SHUTi, SHUTi combined with an existing medication or continuing usual treatment with medication alone. Participants also completed a battery of sleep and mental health measures at baseline. Prior to treatment initiation, the 4-item SURE (Sure of myself; Understand information; Risk-Benefit ratio; Encouragement) scale was administered to screen for CSDC. Relationships between CSDC and baseline covariates were explored using Pearson correlations. Results Of the 55 participants initially enrolled, 94.5% (n=52) of participants preferentially selected SHUTi, either as sole treatment (n=24) or in combination with an existing medication (n=28), over usual treatment with medication alone (n=3). Overall, CSDC was only reported by 5.5% (n=3) of the sample population, with no group differences observed, suggesting effective clarification of treatment options through the decision-aid. Interestingly, higher SURE scores (i.e. less decisional conflict) were negatively correlated with depressive symptoms (r= -0.295, n= 55, p= 0.029) and anxiety symptoms (r= -0.301, n= 55, p= 0.026). Correlations with age, insomnia symptoms, duration of insomnia and fatigue were not statistically significant. Conclusion The patient decision-aid appeared to resolve decisional conflict for 94.5% (n=52) of participants. Findings allude to the potential influence of emotional status on information processing pathways in an insomnia context, warranting further research. Support Research supported by a grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR-IRSC:0441002152).

scholarly journals Patient decision aid based on multi-criteria decision analysis for disease-modifying drugs for multiple sclerosis: prototype development

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I. E. H. Kremer ◽  
P. J. Jongen ◽  
S. M. A. A. Evers ◽  
E. L. J. Hoogervorst ◽  
W. I. M. Verhagen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Disease Modifying Drugs ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Further Development

Abstract Background Since decision making about treatment with disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) for multiple sclerosis (MS) is preference sensitive, shared decision making between patient and healthcare professional should take place. Patient decision aids could support this shared decision making process by providing information about the disease and the treatment options, to elicit the patient’s preference and to support patients and healthcare professionals in discussing these preferences and matching them with a treatment. Therefore, a prototype of a patient decision aid for MS patients in the Netherlands—based on the principles of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) —was developed, following the recommendations of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. MCDA was chosen as it might reduce cognitive burden of considering treatment options and matching patient preferences with the treatment options. Results After determining the scope to include DMDs labelled for relapsing-remitting MS and clinically isolated syndrome, users’ informational needs were assessed using focus groups (N = 19 patients) and best-worst scaling surveys with patients (N = 185), neurologists and nurses (N = 60) to determine which information about DMDs should be included in the patient decision aid. Next, an online format and computer-based delivery of the patient decision aid was chosen to enable embedding of MCDA. A literature review was conducting to collect evidence on the effectiveness and burden of use of the DMDs. A prototype was developed next, and alpha testing to evaluate its comprehensibility and usability with in total thirteen patients and four healthcare professionals identified several issues regarding content and framing, methods for weighting importance of criteria in the MCDA structure, and the presentation of the conclusions of the patient decision aid ranking the treatment options according to the patient’s preferences. Adaptations were made accordingly, but verification of the rankings provided, validation of the patient decision aid, evaluation of the feasibility of implementation and assessing its value for supporting shared decision making should be addressed in further development of the patient decision aid. Conclusion This paper aimed to provide more transparency regarding the developmental process of an MCDA-based patient decision aid for treatment decisions for MS and the challenges faced during this process. Issues identified in the prototype were resolved as much as possible, though some issues remain. Further development is needed to overcome these issues before beta pilot testing with patients and healthcare professionals at the point of clinical decision-making can take place to ultimately enable making conclusions about the value of the MCDA-based patient decision aid for MS patients, healthcare professionals and the quality of care.

scholarly journals Assessing Preference Shift and Effects on Patient Knowledge and Decisional Conflict: Cross-Sectional Study of an Interactive Prostate-Specific Antigen Test Patient Decision Aid (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Scalia ◽  
Glyn Elwyn ◽  
Jan Kremer ◽  
Marjan Faber ◽  
Marie-Anne Durand
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Psa Test ◽  
Psa Testing ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
The Web

BACKGROUND Randomized trials of Web-based decision aids for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing indicate that these interventions improve knowledge and reduce decisional conflict. However, we do not know about these tools’ impact on people who spontaneously use a PSA testing patient decision aid on the internet. OBJECTIVE The objectives of this study were to (1) determine the impact of the Web-based PSA Option Grid patient decision aid on preference shift, knowledge, and decisional conflict; (2) identify which frequently asked questions (FAQs) are associated with preference shift; and (3) explore the possible relationships between these outcomes. METHODS Data were collected between January 1, 2016, and December 30, 2017. Users who accessed the Web-based, interactive PSA Option Grid were provided with 3 options: have a PSA test, no PSA test, or unsure. Users first declared their initial preference and then completed 5 knowledge questions and a 4-item (yes or no) validated decisional conflict scale (Sure of myself, Understand information, Risk-benefit ratio, Encouragement; SURE). Next, users were presented with 10 FAQs and asked to identify their preference for each question based on the information provided. At the end, users declared their final preference and completed the same knowledge and decisional conflict questions. Paired sample t tests were employed to compare before and after knowledge and decisional conflict scores. A multinomial regression analysis was performed to determine which FAQs were associated with a shift in screening preference. RESULTS Of all the people who accessed the PSA Option Grid, 39.8% (186/467) completed the interactive journey and associated surveys. After excluding 22 female users, we analyzed 164 responses. At completion, users shifted their preference to “not having the PSA test” (43/164, 26.2%, vs 117/164, 71.3%; P<.001), had higher levels of knowledge (112/164, 68.3%, vs 146/164, 89.0%; P<.001), and lower decisional conflict (94/164, 57.3%, vs 18/164, 11.0%; P<.001). There were 3 FAQs associated with preference shift: “What does the test involve?” “If my PSA level is high, what are the chances that I have prostate cancer?” and “What are the risks?” We did not find any relationship between knowledge, decisional conflict, and preference shift. CONCLUSIONS Unprompted use of the interactive PSA Option Grid leads to preference shift, increased knowledge, and reduced decisional conflict, which confirms the ability of these tools to influence decision making, even when used outside clinical encounters.

scholarly journals Effect of a patient decision aid (PDA) for type 2 diabetes on knowledge, decisional self-efficacy, and decisional conflict

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert. A. Bailey ◽  
Michael Pfeifer ◽  
Alicia C. Shillington ◽  
Qing Harshaw ◽  
Martha M. Funnell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Patient Decision

Prospective evaluation of a new patient decision aid to enhance prostate cancer screening decision-making.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 87-87
Author(s):  
Michael Austin Brooks ◽  
Anita Misra-Hebert ◽  
Alexander Zajichek ◽  
Sigrid V. Carlsson ◽  
Jonas Hugosson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Literacy ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Psa Screening ◽  
Psa Testing ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
The Impact

87 Background: We previously developed screening nomograms to predict 15-year risk of all-cause mortality, prostate cancer diagnosis, and prostate cancer mortality, and incorporated them into a graphical patient decision aid (PtDA). Our objective was to prospectively recruit primary care patients interested in shared-decision making regarding prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening and assess the impact of individualized counseling using our new PtDA. Methods: 50 patients from one internal medicine practice were enrolled in a single-arm sequential trial design, with face-to-face clinician counseling and questionnaires. Eligibility criteria included men age 50-69 years old and life expectancy > 10 years. Patients were excluded for a personal history of prostate cancer or PSA screening within the prior year. Participants completed baseline questionnaires regarding prior PSA testing, demographic information, health literacy, and the Control Preferences Scale (CPS). They then received standardized counseling (based on large trial and epidemiologic data) regarding PSA screening, followed by individualized counseling using our new PtDA. Participants then made a screening decision, and completed a post decision questionnaire including a Decisional Conflict Scale. Results: The median age was 60 (IQR 54; 65). 41 (82%) had a prior PSA test, while 9 (18%) had not. 42 (84%) of participants received some education beyond high school, 41 (82%) demonstrated high health literacy, and 45 (90%) desired to have an active role in decision-making based on the CPS. After undergoing counseling, 34 (68%) participants chose to undergo initial or repeat PSA screening, 8 (16%) chose against future screening, and 8 (16%) remained uncertain. 45 (90%) participants found individualized counseling using the PtDA more useful than standardized counseling. Finally, patients reported reduced decisional conflict compared to historical controls (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Our process of standardized counseling followed by individualized counseling using our new PtDA was effective in reducing decisional conflict. The majority of participants found the PtDA more useful for decision making than standardized counseling. Clinical trial information: NCT03387527.

scholarly journals Development and field testing of a patient decision aid for management of acute Achilles tendon rupture: a study protocol

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brad Meulenkamp ◽  
Julia Brillinger ◽  
Dean Fergusson ◽  
Dawn Stacey ◽  
Ian D. Graham
Keyword(s):  
Achilles Tendon ◽  
Study Protocol ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Tendon Rupture ◽  
Achilles Tendon Rupture ◽  
Field Testing ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Tendon Ruptures

Abstract Background Achilles tendon ruptures are common injuries in an otherwise healthy, active population. Several treatment options exist, with both surgical and non-surgical options. Each treatment option has a unique set of risks and harms, which may present patients with decisional conflict. The aim of the proposed study is to develop, alpha test and field test a patient decision aid for patients presenting with acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Methods This is a three-stage study protocol. First, we will assemble a multi-disciplinary steering group including patients, clinicians, educators, and researchers to develop the patient decision aid prototype using the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. Second, we will perform a mixed-methods alpha test of the decision aid prototype with patients and clinicians experienced in acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Outcomes measured will include acceptability and usability of the patient decision aid measured using validated outcome scales and semi-structured interviews. A minimum of three rounds of feedback will be obtained. Results will be analyzed using descriptive statistics, reviewed by the steering group, to guide revisions to decision aid prototype at each round. The third stage will be field testing the revised decision aid prototype in usual clinical care. A pre-/post-study will be performed with patients with acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Patients will be recruited from the emergency department and complete the pre-consultation decision aid prior to a one-week follow up with their surgeon. The primary outcome of field testing will be feasibility of implementing the decision aid in the clinical setting and will be measured with recruitment and completion metrics. Secondary outcomes include acceptability of the decision aid, knowledge, preparedness for decision making, and decisional conflict, measured using validated outcome measures. Statistical analysis will be performed using descriptive analysis for primary outcomes and a student t-test and Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test for secondary outcomes. Discussion This comprehensive study protocol outlines the development, alpha testing, and field testing of a patient decision aid for patients with acute Achilles tendon rupture. Systematic and transparent development and testing of patient decision aids is critical to improve decision aid quality. Trial registration Not Applicable.

scholarly journals Decision coaching using a patient decision aid for youth and parents considering insulin delivery methods for type 1 diabetes: a pre/post study

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret L. Lawson ◽  
Allyson L. Shephard ◽  
Bryan Feenstra ◽  
Laura Boland ◽  
Nadia Sourial ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Insulin Delivery ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Delivery Method ◽  
Diabetes Clinic ◽  
Patient Decision

Abstract Background Choice of insulin delivery for type 1 diabetes can be difficult for many parents and children. We evaluated decision coaching using a patient decision aid for helping youth with type 1 diabetes and parents decide about insulin delivery method. Methods A pre/post design. Youth and parent(s) attending a pediatric diabetes clinic in a tertiary care centre were referred to the intervention by their pediatric endocrinologist or diabetes physician between September 2013 and May 2015. A decision coach guided youth and their parents in completing a patient decision aid that was pre-populated with evidence on insulin delivery options. Primary outcomes were youth and parent scores on the low literary version of the validated Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). Results Forty-five youth (mean age = 12.5 ± 2.9 years) and 66 parents (45.8 ± 5.6 years) participated. From pre- to post-intervention, youth and parent decisional conflict decreased significantly (youth mean DCS score was 32.0 vs 6.6, p < 0.0001; parent 37.6 vs 3.5, p < 0.0001). Youth’s and parents’ mean decisional conflict scores were also significantly improved for DCS subscales (informed, values clarity, support, and certainty). 92% of youth and 94% of parents were satisfied with the decision coaching and patient decision aid. Coaching sessions averaged 55 min. Parents (90%) reported that the session was the right length of time; some youth (16%) reported that it was too long. Conclusion Decision coaching with a patient decision aid reduced decisional conflict for youth and parents facing a decision about insulin delivery method.

scholarly journals A Patient Decision Aid for Anticoagulation Therapy in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation: Development and Pilot Study

JMIR Cardio ◽  
10.2196/23464 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. e23464
Author(s):  
Kim Paul de Castro ◽  
Harold Henrison Chiu ◽  
Ronna Cheska De Leon-Yao ◽  
Lorraine Almelor-Sembrana ◽  
Antonio Miguel Dans
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Anticoagulation Therapy ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Mobile App ◽  
Patient Knowledge ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Patient Acceptability ◽  
Patient Decision

Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is one of the most common predisposing factors for ischemic stroke worldwide. Because of this, patients with AF are prescribed anticoagulant medications to decrease the risk. The availability of different options for oral anticoagulation makes it difficult for some patients to decide a preferred choice of medication. Clinical guidelines often recommend enhancing the decision-making process of patients by increasing their involvement in health decisions. In particular, the use of patient decision aids (PDAs) in patients with AF was associated with increased knowledge and increased likelihood of making a choice. However, the majority of available PDAs is from Western countries. Objective We aimed to develop and pilot test a PDA to help patients with nonvalvular AF choose an oral anticoagulant for stroke prevention in the local setting. Outcomes were (1) reduction in patient decisional conflict, (2) improvement in patient knowledge, and (3) patient and physician acceptability. Methods We followed the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) to develop a mobile app–based PDA for anticoagulation therapy in patients with nonvalvular AF. Focus group discussions identified decisional needs, which were subsequently incorporated into the PDA to compare choices for anticoagulation. Based on recommendations, the prototype PDA was rendered by at least 30 patients and 30 physicians. Decisional conflict and patient knowledge were tested before and after the PDA was implemented. Patient acceptability and physician acceptability were measured after each encounter. Results Anticoagulant options were compared by the PDA using three factors that were identified (impact on stroke and bleeding risk, and price). The comparisons were presented as tables and graphs. The prototype PDA was rendered by 30 doctors and 37 patients for pilot testing. The mean duration of the encounters was 15 minutes. The decisional conflict score reduced by 35 points (100-point scale; P<.001). The AF knowledge score improved from 10 to 15 (P<.001). The PDA was acceptable for both patients and doctors. Conclusions Our study showed that an app-based PDA for anticoagulation therapy in patients with nonvalvular AF (1) reduced patient decisional conflict, (2) improved patient knowledge, and (3) was acceptable to patients and physicians. A PDA is potentially acceptable and useful in our setting. A randomized controlled trial is warranted to test its effectiveness compared to usual care. PDAs for other conditions should also be developed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document