Cargando…

The impact of a decision aid about heart disease prevention on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for prevention: a pilot randomized trial

BACKGROUND: Low utilization of effective coronary heart disease (CHD) prevention strategies may be due to many factors, but chief among them is the lack of patient involvement in prevention decisions. We undertook this study to test the effectiveness of an individually-tailored, computerized decisio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sheridan, Stacey L, Shadle, John, Simpson, Ross J, Pignone, Michael P
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1626460/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17005051
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-6-121
_version_ 1782130602743431168
author Sheridan, Stacey L
Shadle, John
Simpson, Ross J
Pignone, Michael P
author_facet Sheridan, Stacey L
Shadle, John
Simpson, Ross J
Pignone, Michael P
author_sort Sheridan, Stacey L
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Low utilization of effective coronary heart disease (CHD) prevention strategies may be due to many factors, but chief among them is the lack of patient involvement in prevention decisions. We undertook this study to test the effectiveness of an individually-tailored, computerized decision aid about CHD on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for CHD prevention. METHODS: We conducted a pilot randomized trial in a convenience sample of adults with no previous history of cardiovascular disease to test the effectiveness of an individually-tailored, computerized decision aid about CHD prevention against a risk factor list that patients could present to their doctor. RESULTS: We enrolled 75 adults. Mean age was 53. 59% were female, 73% white, and 23% African-American. 66% had some college education. 43% had a 10-year CHD risk of 0–5%, 25% a risk of 6–10%, 24% a risk of 11–20%, and 5% a risk of > 20%. 78% had at least one option to reduce their CHD risk, but only 45% accurately identified the strategies best supported by evidence. 41 patients received the decision aid, 34 received usual care. In unadjusted analysis, the decision aid increased the proportion of patients who discussed CHD risk reduction with their doctor from 24% to 40% (absolute difference 16%; 95% CI -4% to +37%) and increased the proportion who had a specific plan to reduce their risk from 24% to 37% (absolute difference 13%; 95% CI -7% to +34%). In pre-post testing, the decision aid also appeared to increase the proportion of patients with plans to intervene on their CHD risk (absolute increase ranging from 21% to 47% for planned medication use and 5% to 16% for planned behavioral interventions). CONCLUSION: Our study confirms patients' limited knowledge about their CHD risk and effective risk reduction options and provides preliminary evidence that an individually-tailored decision aid about CHD prevention might be expected to increase patients' discussions about CHD prevention with their doctor and their plans for CHD risk reduction. These findings should be replicated in studies with a larger sample size and patients at overall higher risk of CHD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00315978
format Text
id pubmed-1626460
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-16264602006-10-28 The impact of a decision aid about heart disease prevention on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for prevention: a pilot randomized trial Sheridan, Stacey L Shadle, John Simpson, Ross J Pignone, Michael P BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Low utilization of effective coronary heart disease (CHD) prevention strategies may be due to many factors, but chief among them is the lack of patient involvement in prevention decisions. We undertook this study to test the effectiveness of an individually-tailored, computerized decision aid about CHD on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for CHD prevention. METHODS: We conducted a pilot randomized trial in a convenience sample of adults with no previous history of cardiovascular disease to test the effectiveness of an individually-tailored, computerized decision aid about CHD prevention against a risk factor list that patients could present to their doctor. RESULTS: We enrolled 75 adults. Mean age was 53. 59% were female, 73% white, and 23% African-American. 66% had some college education. 43% had a 10-year CHD risk of 0–5%, 25% a risk of 6–10%, 24% a risk of 11–20%, and 5% a risk of > 20%. 78% had at least one option to reduce their CHD risk, but only 45% accurately identified the strategies best supported by evidence. 41 patients received the decision aid, 34 received usual care. In unadjusted analysis, the decision aid increased the proportion of patients who discussed CHD risk reduction with their doctor from 24% to 40% (absolute difference 16%; 95% CI -4% to +37%) and increased the proportion who had a specific plan to reduce their risk from 24% to 37% (absolute difference 13%; 95% CI -7% to +34%). In pre-post testing, the decision aid also appeared to increase the proportion of patients with plans to intervene on their CHD risk (absolute increase ranging from 21% to 47% for planned medication use and 5% to 16% for planned behavioral interventions). CONCLUSION: Our study confirms patients' limited knowledge about their CHD risk and effective risk reduction options and provides preliminary evidence that an individually-tailored decision aid about CHD prevention might be expected to increase patients' discussions about CHD prevention with their doctor and their plans for CHD risk reduction. These findings should be replicated in studies with a larger sample size and patients at overall higher risk of CHD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00315978 BioMed Central 2006-09-27 /pmc/articles/PMC1626460/ /pubmed/17005051 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-6-121 Text en Copyright © 2006 Sheridan et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Sheridan, Stacey L
Shadle, John
Simpson, Ross J
Pignone, Michael P
The impact of a decision aid about heart disease prevention on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for prevention: a pilot randomized trial
title The impact of a decision aid about heart disease prevention on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for prevention: a pilot randomized trial
title_full The impact of a decision aid about heart disease prevention on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for prevention: a pilot randomized trial
title_fullStr The impact of a decision aid about heart disease prevention on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for prevention: a pilot randomized trial
title_full_unstemmed The impact of a decision aid about heart disease prevention on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for prevention: a pilot randomized trial
title_short The impact of a decision aid about heart disease prevention on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for prevention: a pilot randomized trial
title_sort impact of a decision aid about heart disease prevention on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for prevention: a pilot randomized trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1626460/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17005051
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-6-121
work_keys_str_mv AT sheridanstaceyl theimpactofadecisionaidaboutheartdiseasepreventiononpatientsdiscussionswiththeirdoctorandtheirplansforpreventionapilotrandomizedtrial
AT shadlejohn theimpactofadecisionaidaboutheartdiseasepreventiononpatientsdiscussionswiththeirdoctorandtheirplansforpreventionapilotrandomizedtrial
AT simpsonrossj theimpactofadecisionaidaboutheartdiseasepreventiononpatientsdiscussionswiththeirdoctorandtheirplansforpreventionapilotrandomizedtrial
AT pignonemichaelp theimpactofadecisionaidaboutheartdiseasepreventiononpatientsdiscussionswiththeirdoctorandtheirplansforpreventionapilotrandomizedtrial
AT sheridanstaceyl impactofadecisionaidaboutheartdiseasepreventiononpatientsdiscussionswiththeirdoctorandtheirplansforpreventionapilotrandomizedtrial
AT shadlejohn impactofadecisionaidaboutheartdiseasepreventiononpatientsdiscussionswiththeirdoctorandtheirplansforpreventionapilotrandomizedtrial
AT simpsonrossj impactofadecisionaidaboutheartdiseasepreventiononpatientsdiscussionswiththeirdoctorandtheirplansforpreventionapilotrandomizedtrial
AT pignonemichaelp impactofadecisionaidaboutheartdiseasepreventiononpatientsdiscussionswiththeirdoctorandtheirplansforpreventionapilotrandomizedtrial