» Articles » PMID: 36743877

What Helps the Successful Implementation of Digital Decision Aids Supporting Shared Decision-making in Cardiovascular Diseases? A Systematic Review

Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Aims: Although digital decision aids (DAs) have been developed to improve shared decision-making (SDM), also in the cardiovascular realm, its implementation seems challenging. This study aims to systematically review the predictors of successful implementation of digital DAs for cardiovascular diseases.

Methods And Results: Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from inception to November 2021. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias. Data were extracted by using a predefined list of variables. Five good-quality studies were included, involving data of 215 patients and 235 clinicians. Studies focused on DAs for coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, and end-stage heart failure patients. Clinicians reported DA content, its effectivity, and a lack of knowledge on SDM and DA use as implementation barriers. Patients reported preference for another format, the way clinicians used the DA and anxiety for the upcoming intervention as barriers. In addition, barriers were related to the timing and Information and Communication Technology (ICT) integration of the DA, the limited duration of a consultation, a lack of communication among the team members, and maintaining the hospital's number of treatments. Clinicians' positive attitude towards preference elicitation and implementation of DAs in existing structures were reported as facilitators.

Conclusion: To improve digital DA use in cardiovascular diseases, the optimum timing of the DA, training healthcare professionals in SDM and DA usage, and integrating DAs into existing ICT structures need special effort. Current evidence, albeit limited, already offers advice on how to improve DA implementation in cardiovascular medicine.

Citing Articles

Healthcare systems collaborating to implement a shared decision-making tool in the electronic health record and build evidence on its adoption and use.

Branda M, Ridgeway J, Mann D, Wieser J, Gomez Y, Dagoberg A Learn Health Syst. 2024; 8(Suppl 1):e10418.

PMID: 38883873 PMC: 11176581. DOI: 10.1002/lrh2.10418.


US practice adoption of patient-engagement strategies and spending for adults with diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

Rodriguez H, Rubio K, Miller-Rosales C, Wood A Health Aff Sch. 2024; 1(1):qxad021.

PMID: 38770409 PMC: 11103728. DOI: 10.1093/haschl/qxad021.


Webtool to enhance the accuracy of diagnostic algorithms for HFpEF: a prospective cross-over study.

Weerts J, Amin H, Aizpurua A, Gevaert A, Handoko M, Dauw J ESC Heart Fail. 2023; 10(6):3493-3503.

PMID: 37724334 PMC: 10682885. DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.14525.

References
1.
ODonnell S, Cranney A, Jacobsen M, Graham I, OConnor A, Tugwell P . Understanding and overcoming the barriers of implementing patient decision aids in clinical practice. J Eval Clin Pract. 2006; 12(2):174-81. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00613.x. View

2.
Coylewright M, Shepel K, Leblanc A, Pencille L, Hess E, Shah N . Shared decision making in patients with stable coronary artery disease: PCI choice. PLoS One. 2012; 7(11):e49827. PMC: 3511494. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0049827. View

3.
Harden S, Smith M, Ory M, Smith-Ray R, Estabrooks P, Glasgow R . RE-AIM in Clinical, Community, and Corporate Settings: Perspectives, Strategies, and Recommendations to Enhance Public Health Impact. Front Public Health. 2018; 6:71. PMC: 5874302. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00071. View

4.
Elwyn G, Scholl I, Tietbohl C, Mann M, Edwards A, Clay C . "Many miles to go …": a systematic review of the implementation of patient decision support interventions into routine clinical practice. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2014; 13 Suppl 2:S14. PMC: 4044318. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S14. View

5.
Joseph-Williams N, Newcombe R, Politi M, Durand M, Sivell S, Stacey D . Toward Minimum Standards for Certifying Patient Decision Aids: A Modified Delphi Consensus Process. Med Decis Making. 2013; 34(6):699-710. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X13501721. View