Cargando…

Assessment of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis shared decision-making intervention (DASH-TOP) using the decisional conflict scale: a mixed-method study

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pregnancy is a major cause of maternal morbidity and death. The use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), despite being the standard of care to prevent VTE, comes with some challenges. Shared decision-making (SDM) interventions are recommended to support...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: León‑García, Montserrat, Humphries, Brittany, Morales, Pablo Roca, Gravholt, Derek, Eckman, Mark H., Bates, Shannon M., Suárez, Nataly R. Espinoza, Xie, Feng, Perestelo‑Pérez, Lilisbeth, Alonso‑Coello, Pablo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10629184/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37932759
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-023-02349-3
_version_ 1785131912829861888
author León‑García, Montserrat
Humphries, Brittany
Morales, Pablo Roca
Gravholt, Derek
Eckman, Mark H.
Bates, Shannon M.
Suárez, Nataly R. Espinoza
Xie, Feng
Perestelo‑Pérez, Lilisbeth
Alonso‑Coello, Pablo
author_facet León‑García, Montserrat
Humphries, Brittany
Morales, Pablo Roca
Gravholt, Derek
Eckman, Mark H.
Bates, Shannon M.
Suárez, Nataly R. Espinoza
Xie, Feng
Perestelo‑Pérez, Lilisbeth
Alonso‑Coello, Pablo
author_sort León‑García, Montserrat
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pregnancy is a major cause of maternal morbidity and death. The use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), despite being the standard of care to prevent VTE, comes with some challenges. Shared decision-making (SDM) interventions are recommended to support patients and clinicians in making preference-sensitive decisions. The quality of the SDM process has been widely assessed with the decisional conflict scale (DCS). Our aim is to report participants’ perspectives of each of the components of an SDM intervention (DASH-TOP) in relation to the different subscales of the DCS. METHODS: Design: A convergent, parallel, mixed-methods design. Participants: The sample consisted of 22 health care professionals, students of an Applied Clinical Research in Health Sciences (ICACS) master program. Intervention: We randomly divided the participants in three groups: Group 1 received one component (evidence -based information), Group 2 received two components (first component and value elicitation exercises), and Group 3 received all three components (the first two and a decision analysis recommendation) of the SDM intervention. Analysis: For the quantitative strand, we used a non-parametric test to analyze the differences in the DCS subscales between the three groups. For the qualitative strand, we conducted a content analysis using the decisional conflict domains to deductively categorize the responses. RESULTS: Groups that received more intervention components experienced less conflict and better decision-making quality, although the differences between groups were not statistically significant. The decision analysis recommendation improved the efficacy with the decision-making process, however there are some challenges when implementing it in clinical practice. The uncertainty subscale showed a high decisional conflict for all three groups; contributing factors included low certainty of the evidence-based information provided and a perceived small effect of the drug to reduce the risk of a VTE event. CONCLUSIONS: The DASH-TOP intervention reduced decisional conflict in the decision -making process, with decision analysis being the most effective component to improve the quality of the decision. There is a need for more implementation research to improve the delivery of SDM interventions in the clinical encounter. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-023-02349-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10629184
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106291842023-11-08 Assessment of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis shared decision-making intervention (DASH-TOP) using the decisional conflict scale: a mixed-method study León‑García, Montserrat Humphries, Brittany Morales, Pablo Roca Gravholt, Derek Eckman, Mark H. Bates, Shannon M. Suárez, Nataly R. Espinoza Xie, Feng Perestelo‑Pérez, Lilisbeth Alonso‑Coello, Pablo BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pregnancy is a major cause of maternal morbidity and death. The use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), despite being the standard of care to prevent VTE, comes with some challenges. Shared decision-making (SDM) interventions are recommended to support patients and clinicians in making preference-sensitive decisions. The quality of the SDM process has been widely assessed with the decisional conflict scale (DCS). Our aim is to report participants’ perspectives of each of the components of an SDM intervention (DASH-TOP) in relation to the different subscales of the DCS. METHODS: Design: A convergent, parallel, mixed-methods design. Participants: The sample consisted of 22 health care professionals, students of an Applied Clinical Research in Health Sciences (ICACS) master program. Intervention: We randomly divided the participants in three groups: Group 1 received one component (evidence -based information), Group 2 received two components (first component and value elicitation exercises), and Group 3 received all three components (the first two and a decision analysis recommendation) of the SDM intervention. Analysis: For the quantitative strand, we used a non-parametric test to analyze the differences in the DCS subscales between the three groups. For the qualitative strand, we conducted a content analysis using the decisional conflict domains to deductively categorize the responses. RESULTS: Groups that received more intervention components experienced less conflict and better decision-making quality, although the differences between groups were not statistically significant. The decision analysis recommendation improved the efficacy with the decision-making process, however there are some challenges when implementing it in clinical practice. The uncertainty subscale showed a high decisional conflict for all three groups; contributing factors included low certainty of the evidence-based information provided and a perceived small effect of the drug to reduce the risk of a VTE event. CONCLUSIONS: The DASH-TOP intervention reduced decisional conflict in the decision -making process, with decision analysis being the most effective component to improve the quality of the decision. There is a need for more implementation research to improve the delivery of SDM interventions in the clinical encounter. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-023-02349-3. BioMed Central 2023-11-06 /pmc/articles/PMC10629184/ /pubmed/37932759 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-023-02349-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
León‑García, Montserrat
Humphries, Brittany
Morales, Pablo Roca
Gravholt, Derek
Eckman, Mark H.
Bates, Shannon M.
Suárez, Nataly R. Espinoza
Xie, Feng
Perestelo‑Pérez, Lilisbeth
Alonso‑Coello, Pablo
Assessment of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis shared decision-making intervention (DASH-TOP) using the decisional conflict scale: a mixed-method study
title Assessment of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis shared decision-making intervention (DASH-TOP) using the decisional conflict scale: a mixed-method study
title_full Assessment of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis shared decision-making intervention (DASH-TOP) using the decisional conflict scale: a mixed-method study
title_fullStr Assessment of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis shared decision-making intervention (DASH-TOP) using the decisional conflict scale: a mixed-method study
title_full_unstemmed Assessment of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis shared decision-making intervention (DASH-TOP) using the decisional conflict scale: a mixed-method study
title_short Assessment of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis shared decision-making intervention (DASH-TOP) using the decisional conflict scale: a mixed-method study
title_sort assessment of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis shared decision-making intervention (dash-top) using the decisional conflict scale: a mixed-method study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10629184/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37932759
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-023-02349-3
work_keys_str_mv AT leongarciamontserrat assessmentofavenousthromboembolismprophylaxisshareddecisionmakinginterventiondashtopusingthedecisionalconflictscaleamixedmethodstudy
AT humphriesbrittany assessmentofavenousthromboembolismprophylaxisshareddecisionmakinginterventiondashtopusingthedecisionalconflictscaleamixedmethodstudy
AT moralespabloroca assessmentofavenousthromboembolismprophylaxisshareddecisionmakinginterventiondashtopusingthedecisionalconflictscaleamixedmethodstudy
AT gravholtderek assessmentofavenousthromboembolismprophylaxisshareddecisionmakinginterventiondashtopusingthedecisionalconflictscaleamixedmethodstudy
AT eckmanmarkh assessmentofavenousthromboembolismprophylaxisshareddecisionmakinginterventiondashtopusingthedecisionalconflictscaleamixedmethodstudy
AT batesshannonm assessmentofavenousthromboembolismprophylaxisshareddecisionmakinginterventiondashtopusingthedecisionalconflictscaleamixedmethodstudy
AT suareznatalyrespinoza assessmentofavenousthromboembolismprophylaxisshareddecisionmakinginterventiondashtopusingthedecisionalconflictscaleamixedmethodstudy
AT xiefeng assessmentofavenousthromboembolismprophylaxisshareddecisionmakinginterventiondashtopusingthedecisionalconflictscaleamixedmethodstudy
AT peresteloperezlilisbeth assessmentofavenousthromboembolismprophylaxisshareddecisionmakinginterventiondashtopusingthedecisionalconflictscaleamixedmethodstudy
AT alonsocoellopablo assessmentofavenousthromboembolismprophylaxisshareddecisionmakinginterventiondashtopusingthedecisionalconflictscaleamixedmethodstudy