» Articles » PMID: 31533828

Beyond Pros and Cons - Developing a Patient Decision Aid to Cultivate Dialog to Build Relationships: Insights from a Qualitative Study and Decision Aid Development

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2019 Sep 20
PMID 31533828
Citations 14
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: An individualized approach using shared decision-making (SDM) and goal setting is a person-centred strategy that may facilitate prioritization of treatment options. SDM has not been adopted extensively in clinical practice. An interprofessional approach to SDM with tools to facilitate patient participation may overcome barriers to SDM use. The aim was to explore decision-making experiences of health professionals and people with diabetes (PwD), then develop an intervention to facilitate interprofessional shared decision-making (IP-SDM) and goal-setting.

Methods: This was a multi-phased study. 1) Feasibility: Using a descriptive qualitative study, individual interviews with primary care physicians, nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, and PwD were conducted. The interviews explored their experiences with SDM and priority-setting, including facilitators and barriers, relevance of a decision aid for priority-setting, and integration of SDM and a decision aid into practice. 2) Development: An evidence-based SDM toolkit was developed, consisting of an online decision aid, MyDiabetesPlan, and implementation tools. MyDiabetesPlan was reviewed by content experts for accuracy and comprehensiveness. Usability assessment was done with 3) heuristic evaluation and 4) user testing, followed by 5) refinement.

Results: Seven PwD and 10 clinicians participated in the interviews. From interviews with PwD, we identified that: (1) approaches to decision-making were diverse and dynamic; (2) a trusting relationship with the clinician and dialog were critical precursors to SDM; and, (3) goal-setting was a dynamic process. From clinicians, we found: (1) complementary (holistic and disease specific) approaches to the complex patient were used; (2) patient-provider agendas for goal-setting were often conflicting; (3) a flexible approach to decision-making was needed; and, (4) conflict could be resolved through SDM. Following usability assessment, we redesigned MyDiabetesPlan to consist of data collection and recommendation stages. Findings were used to finalize a multi-component toolkit and implementation strategy, consisting of MyDiabetesPlan, instructional card and videos, and orientation meetings with participating patients and clinicians.

Conclusions: A decision aid can provide information, facilitate clinician-patient dialog and strengthen the therapeutic relationship. Implementation of the decision aid can fit into a model of team care that respects and exemplifies professional identity, and can facilitate intra-team communication.

Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02379078. Date of Registration: 11 February 2015.

Citing Articles

Digital Age Transformation in Patient-Physician Communication: 25-Year Narrative Review (1999-2023).

Song M, Elson J, Bastola D J Med Internet Res. 2025; 27:e60512.

PMID: 39819592 PMC: 11783030. DOI: 10.2196/60512.


Facilitators and barriers for tuberculosis preventive treatment among patients with latent tuberculosis infection: a qualitative study.

Manoharan A, Siti Nur Farhana H, Manimaran K, Khoo E, Koh W BMC Infect Dis. 2023; 23(1):624.

PMID: 37740196 PMC: 10517541. DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08612-2.


Assessing the sustainability and scalability of a diabetes eHealth innovation: a mixed-methods study.

Sivakumar A, Pan R, Wang A, Choi D, Ben Charif A, Kastner M BMC Health Serv Res. 2023; 23(1):630.

PMID: 37316850 PMC: 10264878. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-023-09618-x.


Development of a measure to assess the quality of proxy decisions about research participation on behalf of adults lacking capacity to consent: the Combined Scale for Proxy Informed Consent Decisions (CONCORD scale).

Shepherd V, Hood K, Gillies K, Wood F Trials. 2022; 23(1):843.

PMID: 36195929 PMC: 9531498. DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06787-8.


Decision aids for home and community care: a systematic review.

Lognon T, Plourde K, Aubin E, Giguere A, Archambault P, Stacey D BMJ Open. 2022; 12(8):e061215.

PMID: 36129731 PMC: 9362828. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061215.


References
1.
MacGregor K, Handley M, Wong S, Sharifi C, Gjeltema K, Schillinger D . Behavior-change action plans in primary care: a feasibility study of clinicians. J Am Board Fam Med. 2006; 19(3):215-23. DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.19.3.215. View

2.
DAgostino Sr R, Vasan R, Pencina M, Wolf P, Cobain M, Massaro J . General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 2008; 117(6):743-53. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.699579. View

3.
Legare F, Stacey D, Briere N, Desroches S, Dumont S, Fraser K . A conceptual framework for interprofessional shared decision making in home care: protocol for a feasibility study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011; 11:23. PMC: 3045286. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-23. View

4.
Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M . Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008; 337:a1655. PMC: 2769032. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.a1655. View

5.
Joosten E, DeFuentes-Merillas L, de Weert G, Sensky T, van der Staak C, de Jong C . Systematic review of the effects of shared decision-making on patient satisfaction, treatment adherence and health status. Psychother Psychosom. 2008; 77(4):219-26. DOI: 10.1159/000126073. View