» Articles » PMID: 30962232

Healthcare Options for People Experiencing Depression (HOPE*D): the Development and Pilot Testing of an Encounter-based Decision Aid for Use in Primary Care

Overview
Journal BMJ Open
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2019 Apr 10
PMID 30962232
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To develop and pilot an encounter-based decision aid (eDA) for people with depression for use in primary care.

Design: We developed an eDA for depression through cognitive interviews and pilot tested it using a one-group pretest, post-test design in primary care. Feasibility, fidelity of eDA use and acceptability were assessed using recruitment rates and semistructured interviews with patients, medical assistants and clinicians. Treatment choice and shared decision-making (SDM) were also assessed.

Setting: Interviews with adult patients and the public were conducted in a mall and library in Grafton County, New Hampshire, while clinician interviews took place by phone or at the clinician's office. Pilot testing occurred in a New Hampshire primary care practice.

Participants: Cognitive interviews were conducted with adults, ≥18 years, who could read English from the following stakeholder groups: history of depression, the public and clinicians. Patients with a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score of ≥5 were recruited for piloting.

Results: Three stages of cognitive interviews were conducted (n=28). Changes to eDA included moving the combination therapy information and access to treatment information, adding colour, modifying pictograms and editing the talk-therapy description. Clinician concerns about patient health literacy were not reflected in patient interviews. Of 59 patients who reviewed study information, 56 were eligible and agreed to participate in pilot testing; however, only 29 could be reached for follow-up. The eDA was widely accepted, though clinicians did not always use it as intended. We found no impact of eDA use on SDM, though patients chose a wider range of treatment options.

Conclusions: We demonstrated the feasibility of the use of an eDA for depression in primary care that was widely accepted. Further research is needed to improve the fidelity with which the eDA is used and to assess its impact on SDM and related health outcomes.

Citing Articles

Improving Parkinson's Disease Care through Systematic Screening for Depression.

Marras C, Meyer Z, Liu H, Luo S, Mantri S, Allen A Mov Disord Clin Pract. 2024; 11(10):1212-1222.

PMID: 39030949 PMC: 11489616. DOI: 10.1002/mdc3.14163.


Supported decision-making interventions in mental healthcare: A systematic review of current evidence and implementation barriers.

Francis C, Johnson A, Wilson R Health Expect. 2024; 27(2):e14001.

PMID: 38433012 PMC: 10909645. DOI: 10.1111/hex.14001.


Comparison of analog and digital patient decision aids for the treatment of depression: a scoping review.

Sedlakova J, Westermair A, Biller-Andorno N, Meier C, Trachsel M Front Digit Health. 2023; 5:1208889.

PMID: 37744684 PMC: 10513051. DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2023.1208889.


Exploring the general practitioners' point of view about clinical scores: a qualitative study.

Pautrat M, Palluau R, Druilhe L, Lebeau J Diagn Progn Res. 2023; 7(1):12.

PMID: 37309014 PMC: 10262349. DOI: 10.1186/s41512-023-00149-x.


Disparities in Shared Decision-Making Research and Practice: The Case for Black American Patients.

Zisman-Ilani Y, Khaikin S, Savoy M, Paranjape A, Rubin D, Jacob R Ann Fam Med. 2023; 21(2):112-118.

PMID: 36750357 PMC: 10042565. DOI: 10.1370/afm.2943.


References
1.
Brodersen J, Schwartz L, Heneghan C, OSullivan J, Aronson J, Woloshin S . Overdiagnosis: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2018; 23(1):1-3. DOI: 10.1136/ebmed-2017-110886. View

2.
Kriston L, Scholl I, Holzel L, Simon D, Loh A, Harter M . The 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Development and psychometric properties in a primary care sample. Patient Educ Couns. 2009; 80(1):94-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.09.034. View

3.
Knafl K, Deatrick J, Gallo A, Holcombe G, Bakitas M, Dixon J . The analysis and interpretation of cognitive interviews for instrument development. Res Nurs Health. 2007; 30(2):224-34. DOI: 10.1002/nur.20195. View

4.
Agoritsas T, Heen A, Brandt L, Alonso-Coello P, Kristiansen A, Akl E . Decision aids that really promote shared decision making: the pace quickens. BMJ. 2015; 350:g7624. PMC: 4707568. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.g7624. View

5.
Hsieh H, Shannon S . Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005; 15(9):1277-88. DOI: 10.1177/1049732305276687. View