The role of patients' meta-preferences in the design and evaluation of decision support systems

Racial and sex differences in optimizing anticoagulation therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation

Study objective

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac rhythm disorder, responsible for 15 % of strokes in the United States. Studies continue to document underuse of anticoagulation therapy in minority populations and women. Our objective was to compare the proportion of AF patients by race and sex who were receiving non-optimal anticoagulation as determined by an Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool (AFDST).

Design setting and participants

Retrospective cohort study including 14,942 patients within University of Cincinnati Health Care system. Data were analyzed between November 18, 2020, and November 20, 2021.

Main outcomes and measures

Discordance between current therapy and that recommended by the AFDST.

Results

In our two-category analysis 6107 (41 %) received non-optimal anticoagulation therapy, defined as current treatment category ≠ AFDST-recommended treatment category. Non-optimal therapy was highest in Black (42 % [n = 712]) and women (42 % [n = 2668]) and lower in White (39 % [n = 4748]) and male (40 % [n = 3439]) patients. Compared with White patients, unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios of receiving non-optimal anticoagulant therapy for Black patients were 1.13; 95 % CI, 1.02-1.30, p = 0.02; and 1.17; 95%CI, 1.04-1.31, p = 0.01; respectively, and 1.10; 95 % CI 1.03-1.18, p = 0.005; and 1.36; 95 % CI, 1.25-1.47, p < 0.001; for females compared with males.

Conclusions and relevance

In patients with atrial fibrillation in the University of Cincinnati Health system, Black race and female sex were independently associated with an increased odds of receiving non-optimal anticoagulant therapy.

Impact of Nurse-Patient Relationship on Quality of Care and Patient Autonomy in Decision-Making

BACKGROUND

The patient is observed to acquire a passive role and the nurse an expert role with a maternalistic attitude. This relationship among others determines the capacity for autonomy in the decision making of patients.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to analyse the nurse-patient relationship and explore their implications for clinical practice, the impact on quality of care, and the decision-making capacity of patients.

DESIGN

A phenomenological qualitative study was conducted.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

Thirteen in-depth interviews with nurses and 61,484 nursing records from internal medicine and specialties departments in a general hospital from 2015-2016.

METHODS

A discourse analysis and triangulation for these sources were conducted.

RESULTS

The category elaborated from nursing records was defined according to the following codes: Good Patient, Bad patient, and Social Problem. Analysis of the interviews resulted in a category defined as Patient as a passive object.

DISCUSSION

A good nurse-patient relationship reduces the days of hospital stay and improves the quality and satisfaction of both. However, in contrast, the good relationship is conditioned by the patient's submissive role.

CONCLUSION

An equal distribution of power allows decisions about health and disease processes to be acquired by patients, autonomously, with the advice of professionals. The nurse-patient relationship should not pursue the change in values and customs of the patient, but position the professional as a witness of the experience of the health and illness process in the patient and family.

Preference-Based Antithrombotic Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: Implications for Clinical Decision Making

Background. Patient preferences and expert-generated clinical practice guidelines regarding treatment decisions may not be identical. The authors compared the thresholds for antithrombotic treatment from studies that determined or modeled the treatment preferences of patients with atrial fibrillation with recommendations from clinical practice guidelines. Methods. Methods included MEDLINE identification, systematic review, and pooling with some reanalysis of primary data from relevant studies. Results. Eight pertinent studies, including 890 patients, were identified. These studies used 3 methods (decision analysis, probability tradeoff, and decision aids) to determine or model patient preferences. All methods highlighted that the threshold above which warfarin was preferred over aspirin was highly variable. In 6 of 8 studies, patient preferences indicated that fewer patients would take warfarin compared to the recommendations of the guidelines. In general, at a stroke rate of 1% with aspirin, half of the participants would prefer warfarin, and at a rate of 2% with aspirin, two thirds would prefer warfarin. In 3 studies, warfarin must provide at least a 0.9% to 3.0% per year absolute reduction in stroke risk for patients to be willing to take it, corresponding to a stroke rate of 2% to 6% on aspirin. Conclusions. For patients with atrial fibrillation, treatment recommendations from clinical practice guidelines often differ from patient preferences, with substantial heterogeneity in their individual preferences. Since patient preferences can have a substantial impact on the clinical decision-making process, acknowledgment of their importance should be incorporated into clinical practice guidelines. Practicing physicians need to balance the patient preferences with the treatment recommendations from clinical practice guidelines.

Decision Aids for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Applicability across Race and Education

Background/Method. Decision aids have not been widely tested in diverse audiences. The authors conducted interviews in a 2 2 race by education design with participants who were 50 years old (n = 188). The decision aid was a benign prostatic hyperplasia videotape. Results. There was an increase in knowledge equal in all groups, with baseline knowledge higher in whites. The decision stage increased in all groups and was equivalent in the marginal-illiterate subgroup (n = 0.15). Conclusion. Contrary to expectations, results show no difference by race or college education in knowledge gain or increase in reported readiness to decide. The video appeared to produce change across race and education. The end decision stage was high, especially in less educated men. Results suggest that decision aids may be effective without tailoring, as suggested previously to enhance health communication in diverse audiences. Research should test findings in representative samples and in clinical encounters and identify types of knowledge absorbed from decision aids and whether the shift to decision reflects data/ knowledge or shared decision-making message.

Financial incentives for increasing uptake of HPV vaccinations: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccinations by 17- to 18-year-old girls in England is below (<35%) target (80%). This trial assesses (a) the impact of financial incentives on uptake and completion of an HPV vaccination program, and (b) whether impacts are moderated by participants' deprivation level. It also assesses the impact of incentives on decision quality to get vaccinated, as measured by attitudes toward the vaccination and knowledge of its consequences.

METHOD

One thousand 16- to 18-year-old girls were invited to participate in an HPV vaccination program: 500 previously uninvited, and 500 unresponsive to previous invitations. Girls randomly received either a standard invitation letter or a letter including the offer of vouchers worth £ 45 (€ 56; $73) for undergoing 3 vaccinations. Girls attending their first vaccination appointment completed a questionnaire assessing decision quality to be vaccinated. Outcomes were uptake of the first and third vaccinations and decision quality.

RESULTS

The intervention increased uptake of the first (first-time invitees: 28.4% vs. 19.6%, odds ratio [OR] = 1.63, 95% confidence interval [CI; 1.08, 2.47]; previous nonattenders: 23.6% vs. 10.4%, OR = 2.65, 95% CI [1.61, 4.38]) and third (first-time invitees: 22.4% vs. 12%, OR = 2.15, 95% CI [1.32, 3.50]; previous nonattenders: 12.4% vs. 3%, OR = 4.28, 95% CI [1.92, 9.55]) vaccinations. Impacts were not moderated by deprivation level. Decision quality was unaffected by the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the intervention increased completion of HPV vaccinations, uptake remained lower than the national target, which, in addition to cost effectiveness and acceptability issues, necessitates consideration of other ways of achieving it.

Integrating Real-Time Clinical Information to Provide Estimates of Net Clinical Benefit of Antithrombotic Therapy for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Background—

Guidelines for anticoagulant therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation are based on stroke risk as calculated by either the CHADS 2 or the CHA 2 DS 2 VASc scores and do not integrate bleeding risk in an explicit, quantitative manner. Our objective was to quantify the net clinical benefit resulting from improved decision making about antithrombotic therapy.

Methods and Results—

This study is a retrospective cohort study of 1876 adults with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation or flutter seen in primary care settings of an integrated healthcare delivery system between December 2012 and January 2014. Projections for quality-adjusted life expectancy reported as quality-adjusted life-years were calculated by a decision analytic model that integrates patient-specific risk factors for stroke and hemorrhage and examines strategies of no antithrombotic therapy, aspirin, or oral anticoagulation with warfarin. Net clinical benefit was defined by the gain or loss in quality-adjusted life expectancy between current treatment and treatment recommended by an Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool. Current treatment was discordant from treatment recommended by the Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool in 931 patients. A clinically significant gain in quality-adjusted life expectancy (defined as ≥0.1 quality-adjusted life-years) was projected in 832 patients. Subgroups were examined. For example, oral anticoagulant therapy was recommended for 188 who currently were receiving no antithrombotic therapy. For the entire cohort, a total of 736 quality-adjusted life-years could be gained were treatment changed to that recommended by the Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool.

Conclusions—

Use of a decision support tool that integrates patient-specific stroke and bleeding risk could result in significant gains in quality-adjusted life expectancy for a primary care population of patients with atrial fibrillation.

Using evidence-based algorithms to improve clinical decision making: the case of a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation

Decision making in health care has evolved substantially over the last century. Up until the late 1970s, medical decision making was predominantly intuitive and anecdotal. It was based on trial and error and involved high levels of problem solving. The 1980s gave way to empirical medicine, which was evidence based probabilistic, and involved pattern recognition and less problem solving. Although this represented a major advance in the quality of medical decision making, limitations existed. The advantages of the gold standard of the randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) are well-known and this technique is irreplaceable in its ability to answer critical clinical questions. However, the RCT does have drawbacks. RCTs are expensive and can only capture a snapshot in time. As treatments change and new technologies emerge, new expensive clinical trials must be undertaken to reevaluate them. Furthermore, in order to best evaluate a single intervention, other factors must be controlled. In addition, the study population may not match that of another organization or provider. Although evidence-based medicine has provided powerful data for clinicians, effectively and efficiently tailoring it to the individual has not yet evolved. We are now in a period of transition from this evidence-based era to one dominated by the personalization and customization of care. It will be fueled by policy decisions to shift financial responsibility to the patient, creating a powerful and sophisticated consumer, unlike any patient we have known before. The challenge will be to apply medical evidence and personal preferences to medical decisions and deliver it efficiently in the increasingly busy clinical setting. In this article, we provide a robust review of the concepts of customized care and some of techniques to deliver it. We will illustrate this through a personalized decision model for the treatment decision after a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation.

Decision Support for Patients

Providing a patient with decision support involves helping that person to choose among two or more elective health care options. “Values Clarification” and “Preference Elicitation” are integral to the full decision-support process. During values clarification, the patient and clinician gain insight into the importance that the patient ascribes to the options’ positive and negative characteristics. During preference elicitation, the patient identifies which options are, overall, personally most favored (and, by corollary, which are least favored). This article identifies the roles that values clarification/preference elicitation (VC/PE) play in the full process of patients’ decision support, outlines various approaches to fostering VC/PE, and poses some fundamental and applied research questions about VC/PE. It also argues that, in order to proceed to answer the posed research questions, investigators in the field of patients’ decision support require a systematic set of criteria for comparing the performance of different VC/PE techniques.

Shared decision making: trade-offs between narrower and broader conceptions

Shared decision-making approaches, by recognizing the autonomy and responsibility of both health professionals and patients, aim for an ethical 'middle way' between 'paternalistic' and 'consumerist' models of clinical decision making. Shared decision making has been understood in various ways. In this paper, we distinguish narrow and broader conceptions of shared decision making and explore their relative strengths and weaknesses. In the first part of the paper, we construct a summary characterization of an archetypal narrow conception of shared decision making (a conception that does not coincide with any specific published model but which reflects features of a variety of models). We show the shortcomings of such a conception and highlight the need to broaden out our thinking about shared decision making if the ethical (and instrumental) goals of shared decision making are to be realized. In the second part of the paper, we acknowledge and explore the advantages and disadvantages of operating with broader conceptions of shared decision making by considering the analogies between health professional-patient relationships and familiar examples of 'open-ended' relationships (e.g. friendships). We conclude by arguing that the illustrated 'trade-offs' between narrow conceptions (which may protect patients from inappropriately paternalistic professionals but preclude important forms of professional support) and broad conceptions (which render more forms of professional support legitimate but may require skills or virtues that not all health professionals possess) suggest the need to find ways, in principle and in practice, of taking seriously both patient autonomy and autonomy-supportive professional intervention.

Feasibility, reliability, and validity of three health-state valuation methods using multiple-outcome vignettes on moderate-risk pregnancy at term

OBJECTIVES

Preference-based health-state valuation methods such as discrete choice experiment (DCE) are claimed to be superior than attitude-based valuation methods like visual analogue scale (VAS) and time trade-off (TTO). We compared VAS, TTO, and DCE in terms of feasibility, reliability, and validity using vignettes depicting moderate-risk pregnancy at term.

METHODS

People from the community (n = 97) participated in both a panel session and an individual home assignment. Each participant valuated 46 vignettes with VAS, TTO, and DCE. Each vignette consisted of five attributes: maternal health antepartum, time between diagnosis and delivery, process of delivery, maternal outcome, and neonatal outcome. The questionnaire included Feasibility, which we evaluated by questionnaire. Test–retest reliability and interobserver consistency were assessed by intraclass correlation (ICC), and variance consistency by generalization theory. Convergent validity was determined with ICC and Cohen's kappa; construct validity was determined with linear regression, multinomial logit modeling, and Kendall's Tau-b correlation (τ).

RESULTS

The DCE was reported as most feasible (DCE: 87% vs. VAS: 69% vs. TTO: 42%). Test–retest reliability was high overall and equal (VAS: ICC = 0.77; TTO: ICC = 0.79; DCE: κ = 0.78). The VAS had the highest interobserver reliability (ICC = 0.73). Convergent validity between VAS and DCE was high (κ = 0.79) and there was sufficient construct validity between VAS and DCE (τ = 0.68). The TTO yielded less optimal results. Generally, neonatal and maternal outcomes weighed most, whereas process outcomes weighed least in moderate-risk pregnancy at term.

CONCLUSIONS

In our context of multidimensional health states with complex trade-offs, DCE was superior to TTO and performed equal to VAS, with DCE displaying slightly higher user feasibility.

Development and testing of a decision board to help clinicians present treatment options to lupus nephritis patients in Brazil

OBJECTIVE

Decision boards (DBs) help clinicians present options and include patients in the decision-making process. Our objective was to describe the steps to develop a DB to support shared decision making and assess reliability and construct validity.

METHODS

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) scenarios were designed with the support of experts for disease severity, potential side effects, and outcomes. The DB comprised clinical information, 2 different treatment options (oral and intravenous), a description of the potential to control SLE within 5 years, and a list of potential side effects. Patients selected what they thought would be the 3 worst side effects and were informed of the probability that these would occur. We presented the DB to 172 patients who were asked to select and justify 1 treatment option. Reliability was assessed by kappa statistics. Construct validity was tested by an a priori hypothesis, analyzing the correlation between treatment decision and side effects selected, self-assessment score, educational level, and clinical aspects.

RESULTS

Patients favored oral medication, and side effects most often listed were iatrogenic cancer (44.2%), hair loss (21.6%), and severe infection (19.1%). Justifications were risk (48.9%), practicality (36.6%), effectiveness (12.2%), and risk-benefit tradeoff (2.3%). Reliability was similar to that found in the test phase (kappa = 0.689, P < 0.001). Validity was tested by prediction of treatment decision based on the undesirable side effects selected (P = 0.047). DB content was clear and easy for all patients to understand (P = 0.05). Immunosuppressive drugs influenced patient decisions (P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

DB is a reliable and valid instrument to assess SLE patient preference.

A perspective on the patient's role in treatment decisions

There is considerable evidence, across different clinical contexts, that treatment decisions are characterized by poor communication, significant knowledge gaps, and a lack of attention to patients' preferences for different health states. Over the past two decades, patient decision aids have been shown to be an effective means to improve the quality of decisions. More recently, the Internet has increased expectations about the impact of information and decision aids on the involvement of patients in decisions. However, there are several challenges to effective dissemination and implementation of decision support interventions, through the Internet or other media. The authors recommend specific policy and research initiatives to facilitate the local and system-level changes necessary to support patients more effectively in making treatment choices. More attention to measurement and policy-level interventions will be required to increase the use of proven tools and to achieve significant improvements in the quality of treatment decisions.

Are patient decision aids the best way to improve clinical decision making? Report of the IPDAS Symposium

This article reports on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Symposium held in 2006 at the annual meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The symposium featured a debate regarding the proposition that "decision aids are the best way to improve clinical decision making.'' The formal debate addressed the theoretical problem of the appropriate gold standard for an improved decision, efficacy of decision aids, and prospects for implementation. Audience comments and questions focused on both theory and practice: the often unacknowledged roots of decision aids in expected utility theory and the practical problems of limited patient decision aid implementation in health care. The participants' vote on the proposition was approximately half for and half against.

MATRIX - development and feasibility of a guide for quality assessment of patient decision aids

Decision aids (DAs) are interventions designed to help people make specific and deliberative choices among options by providing information about the options and outcomes that is relevant to a person's health status.There is an ongoing discussion about the quality of DAs. The present article provides an overview on systematic approaches using various quality criteria. However, these evaluation guides are not yet implemented. Up to now quality assessment of DAs is often limited to the evidence on efficacy through controlled trials using single-outcome measures. Since DAs are multi-component interventions, single-outcome trials are not sufficient for complete quality assessment. Consideration of theoretical founding and the development process is required. In an earlier paper we proposed a novel concept of quality to meet this challenge. We introduced MATRIX a guide for quality assessment of DAs aimed at disclosing the rationale behind underpinning theories, methods, and goals of a DA. The present paper reports how the development of MATRIX progressed including results of pre-testing and a feasibility study. We present the revised version of MATRIX, explain its basic concept, and describe the way to use it.

Patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis preferred oral therapies to phototherapies: a preference assessment based on clinical scenarios with trade-off questions

OBJECTIVE

The importance of validly identifying and incorporating patients' views for improving health care is generally acknowledged. Common approaches to assess patients' preferences are based on the quality adjusted life year (QALY) framework, but this ignores a number of aspects that may be relevant. As an alternative, we assessed patients' treatment preferences and trade-offs for five common systemic therapies for psoriasis.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Twenty-nine patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis expressed treatment preferences for five oral and phototherapies and indicated the relative importance of various treatment attributes, such as adverse effects, discomforts, and safety measures. In a structured interview, they were presented with clinical scenarios that contained descriptions of process and outcome characteristics and illustrations of the anticipated treatment benefit.

RESULTS

Over all paired comparisons, methotrexate (33%), cyclosporin (30%), acitretin (15%), UV-B (14%), and PUVA (8%) were preferred to the other treatment. Patients were willing to trade-off their initial preference for more improvement of psoriasis.

CONCLUSIONS

Psoriasis patients generally prefer oral to phototherapies and consider most adverse effects and several discomforts important for selecting treatment. Our scenario-based structured interview approach to treatment preferences allowed us to incorporate a broad spectrum of potentially relevant decision components in a clinically meaningful way.

Decision-making about mode of delivery after previous caesarean section: development and piloting of two computer-based decision aids

OBJECTIVE

To develop and pilot two computer-based decision aids to assist women with decision-making about mode of delivery after a previous caesarean section (CS), which could then be evaluated in a randomized-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND

Women with a previous CS are faced with a decision between repeat elective CS and vaginal birth after caesarean. Research has shown that women may benefit from access to comprehensive information about the risks and benefits of the delivery options.

DESIGN

A qualitative pilot study of two novel decision aids, an information program and a decision analysis program, which were developed by a multidisciplinary research team.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

15 women who had recently given birth and had previously had a CS and 11 pregnant women with a previous CS, recruited from two UK hospitals. Women were interviewed and observed using the decision aids.

RESULTS

Participants found both decision aids useful and informative. Most liked the computer-based format. Participants found the utility assessment of the decision analysis program acceptable although some had difficulty completing the tasks required. Following the pilot study improvements were made to expand the program content, the decision analysis program was accompanied by a training session and a website version of the information program was developed to allow repeat access.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study was an essential step in the design of the decision aids and in establishing their acceptability and feasibility. In general, participating women viewed the decision aids as a welcome addition to routine antenatal care. A randomized trial has been conducted to establish the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the decision aids.

Clinical decision-making: Patients' preferences and experiences

OBJECTIVE

To determine the congruence between patients' preferred style of clinical decision-making and the style they usually experienced and whether this congruence was associated with socio-economic status and/or the perceived quality of care provided by the respondent's regular doctor.

METHODS

Cross-sectional survey of the American public using computer-assisted telephone interviewing.

RESULTS

Three thousand two hundred and nine interviews were completed (completion rate 72%). Sixty-two percent of respondents preferred shared decision-making, 28% preferred consumerism and 9% preferred paternalism. Seventy percent experienced their preferred style of clinical decision-making. Experiencing the preferred style was associated with high income (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.16-2.16) and having a regular doctor who was perceived as providing excellent or very good care (OR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.83-3.11).

CONCLUSION

Both socio-economic status and having a regular doctor whom the respondent rated highly are independently associated with patients experiencing their preferred style of clinical decision-making.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Systems which promote continuity of care and the development of an on-going doctor-patient relationship may promote equity in health care, by helping patients experience their preferred style of clinical decision-making.

Women's experience of decision making about mode of delivery after a previous caesarean section: the role of health professionals and information about health risks

OBJECTIVE

To explore women's experiences of decision making about mode of delivery after previous caesarean section.

DESIGN

A qualitative interview study.

SETTING

Two city maternity units in southwest England and Eastern Scotland.

SAMPLE

Twenty-one women who had recently delivered a baby and whose previous child was delivered by caesarean section.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews analysed using the framework approach.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Women's views on the influence of uncertainty on decision making, issues concerning information provision and decision-making roles.

RESULTS

Experiences of decision making varied considerably. Some women were certain about choosing either vaginal birth after caesarean or repeat elective caesarean section, others were very uncertain and for some this uncertainty persisted after the birth. Information was most commonly provided by hospital doctors (mainly consultants) and more often related to procedural issues rather than possible health risks and benefits. Women felt they had to actively seek information rather than it being provided routinely. Most women were able to make their own decision about mode of delivery. Health professionals generally took a supportive role whichever mode of delivery was chosen. Although many women were comfortable with this approach, some felt they would have liked more guidance.

CONCLUSION

On the whole, women experienced having control over the decision about planned mode of delivery. For many, making this decision was difficult and for some it was the cause of prolonged anxiety. Women were often making the decision without being provided with comprehensive and specific information about possible health risks and benefits. We are currently conducting a randomised controlled trial to investigate whether access to a decision aid is beneficial to women in this situation.

A randomised controlled trial of a decision-aid leaflet to facilitate women's choice between pregnancy termination methods

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of a decision aid to help women choose between surgical and medical methods of pregnancy termination.

DESIGN

A randomised controlled trial comparing a decision-aid leaflet about termination methods with a control leaflet about contraception.

SETTING

An NHS regional centre for pregnancy termination.

SAMPLE

All women less than 9 weeks of gestation referred for termination of pregnancy over 7 months in 2002.

METHODS

Participants were given an envelope containing either the decision-aid or the control leaflet prior to choosing between medical and surgical termination methods and completed two questionnaires, one immediately after this consultation and another after the termination procedure.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Choice of termination method; measures of effective decision making including risk perception, attitudes and knowledge of both the medical and surgical methods; decisional conflict; anxiety and usefulness of the leaflet.

RESULTS

Three hundred and twenty-eight women participated. There was no difference in the method chosen between the groups (60/162 women in the decision-aided group chose a medical method versus 54/164 women in the control group (OR 1.2; 95% CI 0.76-1.9). Women in the decision-aided group had higher knowledge and lower risk-perception scores about both methods, more positive attitudes about the medical method, lower decisional conflict, more stable evaluations of the decision information over time and higher perceived usefulness of information ratings. Anxiety was high but unrelated to leaflet type.

CONCLUSIONS

Women made more informed decisions when provided with an evidence-based decision-aid leaflet preceding a routine consultation about choices of termination method.

Informed choice for screening: implications for evaluation

Evaluation of screening should reflect consumer priorities. We need to make more effort to find out what they really are

Complex causal process diagrams for analyzing the health impacts of policy interventions

Causal diagrams are rigorous tools for controlling confounding. They also can be used to describe complex causal systems, which is done routinely in communicable disease epidemiology. The use of change diagrams has advantages over static diagrams, because change diagrams are more tractable, relate better to interventions, and have clearer interpretations. Causal diagrams are a useful basis for modeling. They make assumptions explicit, provide a framework for analysis, generate testable predictions, explore the effects of interventions, and identify data gaps. Causal diagrams can be used to integrate different types of information and to facilitate communication both among public health experts and between public health experts and experts in other fields. Causal diagrams allow the use of instrumental variables, which can help control confounding and reverse causation.

Integrating Decision Making and Mental Health Interventions Research: Research Directions

The importance of incorporating patient and provider decision-making processes is in the forefront of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) agenda for improving mental health interventions and services. Key concepts in patient decision making are highlighted within a simplified model of patient decision making that links patient-level/"micro" variables to services-level/"macro" variables via the decision-making process that is a target for interventions. The prospective agenda for incorporating decision-making concepts in mental health research includes (a) improved measures for characterizing decision-making processes that are matched to study populations, complexity, and types of decision making; (b) testing decision aids in effectiveness research for diverse populations and clinical settings; and (c) improving the understanding and incorporation of preference concepts in enhanced intervention designs.

Evidence-based patient choice: a prostate cancer decision aid in plain language

Background

Decision aids (DA) to assist patients in evaluating treatment options and sharing in decision making have proliferated in recent years. Most require high literacy and do not use plain language principles. We describe one of the first attempts to design a decision aid using principles from reading research and document design. The plain language DA prototype addressed treatment decisions for localized prostate cancer. Evaluation assessed impact on knowledge, decisions, and discussions with doctors in men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer.

Methods

Document development steps included preparing an evidence-based DA in standard medical parlance, iteratively translating it to emphasize shared decision making and plain language in three formats (booklet, Internet, and audio-tape). Scientific review of medical content was integrated with expert health literacy review of document structure and design. Formative evaluation methods included focus groups (n = 4) and survey of a new sample of men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer (n = 60), compared with historical controls (n = 184).

Results

A transparent description of the development process and design elements is reported. Formative evaluation among newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients found the DA to be clear and useful in reaching a decision. Newly diagnosed patients reported more discussions with doctors about treatment options, and showed increases in knowledge of side effects of radiation therapy.

Conclusion

The plain language DA presenting medical evidence in text and numerical formats appears acceptable and useful in decision-making about localized prostate cancer treatment. Further testing should evaluate the impact of all three media on decisions made and quality of life in the survivorship period, especially among very low literacy men.

Treatment decision aids: conceptual issues and future directions

BACKGROUND

In the last 10 years, there has been a major growth in the development of treatment decision aids. Multiple goals have been identified for these tools. However, the rationale for and meaning of these goals at the conceptual level, the mechanisms through which decision aids are intended to achieve these goals, and value assumptions underlying the design of aids and associated values clarification exercises have often not been made explicit.

OBJECTIVE

In this paper, we present ideas to help inform the future development and evaluation of decision aids.

RESULTS

We suggest, (i) that the appropriateness of using any decision aid be assessed within the context of the wider decision-making encounter within which it is embedded; (ii) that goal setting activities drive measurement activities and not the other way round; (iii) that the rationale for and meaning of goals at the conceptual level, and mechanisms through which they are intended to have an impact be clearly thought through and made explicit; (iv) that value assumptions underlying both decision aids and associated values clarification exercises be communicated to patients; (v) that taxonomies developed and used to classify various types of decision aids include a section on value assumptions underlying each tool; (vi) that further debate and discussion take place on the role of explicit values clarification exercises as a component of or adjunct to treatment decision aids and the feasibility of implementing valid measures.

CONCLUSION

Further debate and discussion is needed on the above issues.

New modes of practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The practice of rheumatology needs to adapt to the changing pressures of modern medicine. This review looks at reports of how rheumatologists work and seeks new evidence of how rheumatologists might work in the future.

RECENT FINDINGS

Surveys of rheumatologist opinion and of outpatient practice show that demand outstrips supply when it comes to care provision. However, differences in case mix will determine which strategies are best to improve care at particular rheumatologic centers. Educating general practitioners by collaborative consultations may help to improve referral patterns when they are inappropriate, but will not allow a reduction in long-term follow-up. Changing the underlying systems of care, and including nonphysicians in care pathways and processes, is a likely route to improvement, and a new way of running "direct access" clinics may prove to be an important step forward. Involving patients in decisions about their treatment is a fashionable objective but is more difficult to achieve than might be imagined.

SUMMARY

Service developments to improve rheumatologic care will be specific to local circumstances, but will rest on the introduction of patterns of work that are structured and address the issue of long-term follow-up. Patients' educational needs and decision support systems need a lot more research.

The development and preliminary evaluation of a decision aid based on decision analysis for two treatment conditions: benign prostatic hyperplasia and hypertension

This paper discusses the development and evaluation of a computerised decision aid that provides individualised information about Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) and Hypertension to patients. The program is based on decision analysis, using decision trees as a way of providing users with information regarding the probability of different outcomes occurring, obtaining an individual evaluation of the different outcomes, before providing guidance on what might be the 'best' option for that patient. It is intended that the program can be used as the basis for helping patients to become more involved in decisions about their medical treatment. Eight health care professionals and 19 patients (9 with BPH and 10 with Hypertension) evaluated the program. Overall it was assessed positively by both health care professionals and patients. However, before it can be integrated into health care practice, the program is to be evaluated further in a randomised trial.

A factorial randomised controlled trial of decision analysis and an information video plus leaflet for newly diagnosed hypertensive patients

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of evidence regarding the value of tools designed to aid decision making in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension.

AIM

To evaluate two interventions for assisting newly diagnosed hypertensive patients in the decision whether to start drug therapy for reducing blood pressure.

DESIGN OF STUDY

Factorial randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Twenty-one general practices in south-west England, UK.

METHOD

Adults aged 32 to 80 years with newly diagnosed hypertension were randomised to receive either: (a) computerised utility assessment interview with individualized risk assessment and decision analysis; or (b) information video and leaflet about high blood pressure; or (c) both interventions; or (d) neither intervention. Outcome measures were decisional conflict, knowledge, state anxiety, intentions regarding starting treatment, and actual treatment decision.

RESULTS

Of 217 patients randomised, 212 (98%) were analysed at the primary follow-up (mean age = 59 years, 49% female). Decision analysis patients had lower decisional conflict than those who did not receive this intervention (27.6 versus 38.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] for adjusted difference = -13.0 to -5.8, P < 0.001), greater knowledge about hypertension (73% versus 67%, adjusted 95% CI = 2% to 9%, P = 0.003) and no evidence of increased state anxiety (34.8 versus 36.8, adjusted 95% CI = -5.6 to 0.1, P = 0.055). Video/leaflet patients had lower decisional conflict than corresponding controls (30.3 versus 36.8, adjusted 95% CI = -7.4 to -0.6, P = 0.021), greater knowledge (75% versus 65%, adjusted 95% CI = 6% to 13%, P < 0.001) and no evidence of increased state anxiety (35.7 versus 36.1, adjusted 95% CI = -3.9 to 1.7, P = 0.46). There were no differences between either of the interventions and their respective controls in the proportion of patients prescribed antihypertensive medication (67%).

CONCLUSIONS

This trial demonstrates that, among patients facing a real treatment decision, interventions to inform patients about hypertension and to clarify patients' values concerning outcomes of treatment are effective in reducing decisional conflict and increasing patient knowledge, while not resulting in any increases in state anxiety.

Predicting end-stage renal disease: Bayesian perspective of information transfer in the clinical decision-making process at the individual level

BACKGROUND

Predicting outcomes such as end-stage renal disease (ESRD) by integration and better utilization at individual level of epidemiologic data may facilitate clinical decision-making processes.

METHODS

To predict individual ESRD risk in an average patient in the United States, ESRD prevalence and levels of uncertainty and conditional risk factors independence were considered by population data (1998) and pooled analysis of 11 randomized trials. Data integration and input were by decision-tree simulation approach (simple, parallel, and sequential scenarios) and Bayes' theorem. Sensitivity analysis and risk profiles were employed to address uncertainty and assess different risk factor combinations. A health state values, associated with ESRD outcome levels, were taken from the literature.

RESULTS

In this theoretical study, we provided a scholarly example about the use of two known risk factors (urinary protein >/=3 g/day and systolic blood pressure >/=140 mm Hg) to predict individual ESRD risk in an average patient in the United States. The highest posterior (decisional) probability of ESRD occurrence (risk of 3.61% to 5.07%) in the individual patient was associated with the worst health state, as assessed by multidimensional scenarios when both risk factors were present.

CONCLUSION

Decision tree models through an empirical Bayesian approach may serve to predict the individual ESRD risk on the basis of simple epidemiologic, demographic, and clinical information that is easily available already at the first patient evaluation.