Cargando…

Decision coaching using the Ottawa family decision guide with parents and their children: a field testing study

BACKGROUND: Although children can benefit from being included in health decisions, little is known about effective interventions to support their involvement. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of decision coaching guided by the Ottawa Family Decision Guide...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Feenstra, Bryan, Lawson, Margaret L, Harrison, Denise, Boland, Laura, Stacey, Dawn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4326318/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25889602
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-014-0126-2
_version_ 1782356907302846464
author Feenstra, Bryan
Lawson, Margaret L
Harrison, Denise
Boland, Laura
Stacey, Dawn
author_facet Feenstra, Bryan
Lawson, Margaret L
Harrison, Denise
Boland, Laura
Stacey, Dawn
author_sort Feenstra, Bryan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although children can benefit from being included in health decisions, little is known about effective interventions to support their involvement. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of decision coaching guided by the Ottawa Family Decision Guide with children and parents considering insulin delivery options for type 1 diabetes (insulin pump, multiple daily injections, or standard insulin injections). METHODS: Pre-/post-test field testing design. Eligible participants were children (≤18 years) with type 1 diabetes and their parents attending an ambulatory diabetes clinic in a tertiary children’s hospital. Parent–child dyads received decision coaching using the Ottawa Family Decision Guide that was pre-populated with evidence on insulin delivery options, benefits, and harms. Primary outcomes were feasibility of recruitment and data collection, and parent and child acceptability of the intervention. RESULTS: Of 16 families invited to participate, 12 agreed and 7 attended the decision coaching session. For the five missed families, two families were unable to attend the session or the decision coach was not available (N=3). Baseline and immediately post-coaching questionnaires were all completed and follow-up questionnaires two weeks post-coaching were missing from one parent–child dyad. Missing questionnaire items were 5 of 340 items for children (1.5%) and 1 of 429 for parents (0.2%). Decision coaching was rated as acceptable with higher scores from parents and their children who were in earlier stages of decision making. CONCLUSION: Decision coaching with children and their parents considering insulin options was feasible implement and evaluate in our diabetes clinic and was acceptable to participants. Recruitment was difficult due to scheduling restrictions related to the timing of the study. Coaching should target participants earlier in the decision making process and be scheduled at times that are convenient for families and coaches. Findings were used to inform a full-scale evaluation that is currently underway.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4326318
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43263182015-02-14 Decision coaching using the Ottawa family decision guide with parents and their children: a field testing study Feenstra, Bryan Lawson, Margaret L Harrison, Denise Boland, Laura Stacey, Dawn BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research Article BACKGROUND: Although children can benefit from being included in health decisions, little is known about effective interventions to support their involvement. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of decision coaching guided by the Ottawa Family Decision Guide with children and parents considering insulin delivery options for type 1 diabetes (insulin pump, multiple daily injections, or standard insulin injections). METHODS: Pre-/post-test field testing design. Eligible participants were children (≤18 years) with type 1 diabetes and their parents attending an ambulatory diabetes clinic in a tertiary children’s hospital. Parent–child dyads received decision coaching using the Ottawa Family Decision Guide that was pre-populated with evidence on insulin delivery options, benefits, and harms. Primary outcomes were feasibility of recruitment and data collection, and parent and child acceptability of the intervention. RESULTS: Of 16 families invited to participate, 12 agreed and 7 attended the decision coaching session. For the five missed families, two families were unable to attend the session or the decision coach was not available (N=3). Baseline and immediately post-coaching questionnaires were all completed and follow-up questionnaires two weeks post-coaching were missing from one parent–child dyad. Missing questionnaire items were 5 of 340 items for children (1.5%) and 1 of 429 for parents (0.2%). Decision coaching was rated as acceptable with higher scores from parents and their children who were in earlier stages of decision making. CONCLUSION: Decision coaching with children and their parents considering insulin options was feasible implement and evaluate in our diabetes clinic and was acceptable to participants. Recruitment was difficult due to scheduling restrictions related to the timing of the study. Coaching should target participants earlier in the decision making process and be scheduled at times that are convenient for families and coaches. Findings were used to inform a full-scale evaluation that is currently underway. BioMed Central 2015-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4326318/ /pubmed/25889602 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-014-0126-2 Text en © Feenstra et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Feenstra, Bryan
Lawson, Margaret L
Harrison, Denise
Boland, Laura
Stacey, Dawn
Decision coaching using the Ottawa family decision guide with parents and their children: a field testing study
title Decision coaching using the Ottawa family decision guide with parents and their children: a field testing study
title_full Decision coaching using the Ottawa family decision guide with parents and their children: a field testing study
title_fullStr Decision coaching using the Ottawa family decision guide with parents and their children: a field testing study
title_full_unstemmed Decision coaching using the Ottawa family decision guide with parents and their children: a field testing study
title_short Decision coaching using the Ottawa family decision guide with parents and their children: a field testing study
title_sort decision coaching using the ottawa family decision guide with parents and their children: a field testing study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4326318/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25889602
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-014-0126-2
work_keys_str_mv AT feenstrabryan decisioncoachingusingtheottawafamilydecisionguidewithparentsandtheirchildrenafieldtestingstudy
AT lawsonmargaretl decisioncoachingusingtheottawafamilydecisionguidewithparentsandtheirchildrenafieldtestingstudy
AT harrisondenise decisioncoachingusingtheottawafamilydecisionguidewithparentsandtheirchildrenafieldtestingstudy
AT bolandlaura decisioncoachingusingtheottawafamilydecisionguidewithparentsandtheirchildrenafieldtestingstudy
AT staceydawn decisioncoachingusingtheottawafamilydecisionguidewithparentsandtheirchildrenafieldtestingstudy