Cargando…

Prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict: an analysis of five studies on decision-making in primary care

OBJECTIVES: Unresolved clinically significant decisional conflict (CSDC) in patients following a consultation with health professionals is often the result of inadequate patient involvement in decision-making and may result in poor outcomes. We sought to identify the prevalence of CSDC in studies on...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thompson-Leduc, Philippe, Turcotte, Stéphane, Labrecque, Michel, Légaré, France
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4932317/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27354076
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011490
_version_ 1782441047567106048
author Thompson-Leduc, Philippe
Turcotte, Stéphane
Labrecque, Michel
Légaré, France
author_facet Thompson-Leduc, Philippe
Turcotte, Stéphane
Labrecque, Michel
Légaré, France
author_sort Thompson-Leduc, Philippe
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Unresolved clinically significant decisional conflict (CSDC) in patients following a consultation with health professionals is often the result of inadequate patient involvement in decision-making and may result in poor outcomes. We sought to identify the prevalence of CSDC in studies on decision-making in primary care and to explore its risk factors. SETTING: We performed a secondary analysis of existing data sets from studies conducted in Primary Care Practice-Based Research Networks in Québec and Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible studies included a patient-reported measure on the 16-item Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) following a decision made with a healthcare professional with no study design restriction. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: CSDC was defined as a score ≥25/100 on the DCS. The prevalence of CSDC was stratified by sex; and patient-level logistic regression analysis was performed to explore its potential risk factors. Data sets of studies were analysed individually and qualitatively compared. RESULTS: 5 projects conducted between 2003 and 2010 were included. They covered a range of decisions: prenatal genetic screening, antibiotics for acute respiratory infections and miscellaneous. Altogether, the 5 projects gathered data from encounters with a total of 1338 primary care patients (69% female; range of age 15–83). The prevalence of CSDC in patients varied across studies and ranged from 10.3% (95% CI 7.2% to 13.4%) to 31.1% (95% CI 26.6% to 35.6%). Across the 5 studies, risk factors of CSDC included being male, living alone and being 45 or older. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of CSDC in patients who had enrolled in studies conducted in primary care contexts was substantial and appeared to vary according to the type of decision as well as to patient characteristics such as sex, living arrangement and age. Patients presenting risk factors of CSDC should be offered tools to increase their involvement in decision-making.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4932317
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49323172016-07-12 Prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict: an analysis of five studies on decision-making in primary care Thompson-Leduc, Philippe Turcotte, Stéphane Labrecque, Michel Légaré, France BMJ Open General practice / Family practice OBJECTIVES: Unresolved clinically significant decisional conflict (CSDC) in patients following a consultation with health professionals is often the result of inadequate patient involvement in decision-making and may result in poor outcomes. We sought to identify the prevalence of CSDC in studies on decision-making in primary care and to explore its risk factors. SETTING: We performed a secondary analysis of existing data sets from studies conducted in Primary Care Practice-Based Research Networks in Québec and Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible studies included a patient-reported measure on the 16-item Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) following a decision made with a healthcare professional with no study design restriction. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: CSDC was defined as a score ≥25/100 on the DCS. The prevalence of CSDC was stratified by sex; and patient-level logistic regression analysis was performed to explore its potential risk factors. Data sets of studies were analysed individually and qualitatively compared. RESULTS: 5 projects conducted between 2003 and 2010 were included. They covered a range of decisions: prenatal genetic screening, antibiotics for acute respiratory infections and miscellaneous. Altogether, the 5 projects gathered data from encounters with a total of 1338 primary care patients (69% female; range of age 15–83). The prevalence of CSDC in patients varied across studies and ranged from 10.3% (95% CI 7.2% to 13.4%) to 31.1% (95% CI 26.6% to 35.6%). Across the 5 studies, risk factors of CSDC included being male, living alone and being 45 or older. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of CSDC in patients who had enrolled in studies conducted in primary care contexts was substantial and appeared to vary according to the type of decision as well as to patient characteristics such as sex, living arrangement and age. Patients presenting risk factors of CSDC should be offered tools to increase their involvement in decision-making. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4932317/ /pubmed/27354076 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011490 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle General practice / Family practice
Thompson-Leduc, Philippe
Turcotte, Stéphane
Labrecque, Michel
Légaré, France
Prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict: an analysis of five studies on decision-making in primary care
title Prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict: an analysis of five studies on decision-making in primary care
title_full Prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict: an analysis of five studies on decision-making in primary care
title_fullStr Prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict: an analysis of five studies on decision-making in primary care
title_full_unstemmed Prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict: an analysis of five studies on decision-making in primary care
title_short Prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict: an analysis of five studies on decision-making in primary care
title_sort prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict: an analysis of five studies on decision-making in primary care
topic General practice / Family practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4932317/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27354076
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011490
work_keys_str_mv AT thompsonleducphilippe prevalenceofclinicallysignificantdecisionalconflictananalysisoffivestudiesondecisionmakinginprimarycare
AT turcottestephane prevalenceofclinicallysignificantdecisionalconflictananalysisoffivestudiesondecisionmakinginprimarycare
AT labrecquemichel prevalenceofclinicallysignificantdecisionalconflictananalysisoffivestudiesondecisionmakinginprimarycare
AT legarefrance prevalenceofclinicallysignificantdecisionalconflictananalysisoffivestudiesondecisionmakinginprimarycare