Patient Agenda Setting and Clinic Efficiency in Outpatients

A Randomized Controlled Trial to Assess the Impact of an Agenda Setting Form in a Respiratory Outpatient Clinic: Are Patients More Likely to Perceive That Their Important Issues Are Discussed and Does the Form Improve Clinic Efficiency?

The purpose of the study is to determine whether patients who use a prompt sheet to identify their important issues before they see a doctor are more likely to feel that their important issues have been discussed during their consultation. The study will be conducted in a respiratory outpatient clinic.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Respiratory Tract Diseases
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Patient agenda form

Detailed Description

Evidence suggests that most patients come to a consultation with issues they wish to raise, but they may not actually raise them and clinicians may not elicit them. This can adversely affect the consultation outcome, e.g. through misunderstandings, unwanted prescriptions, non-adherence and unnecessary follow-ups. In a review of methods used before consultations to help patients address their information needs Kinnersely et al. (2009) found that there were small but statistically significant increases in patient satisfaction and the number of questions patients asked, and no effect on consultation length. However, they identified several gaps in the evidence including the need to assess a wider range of outcome measures, to identify the impact of the methods on the types of questions asked and the need to measure consultation length accurately.

This study aims to assess the impact of a written agenda form in a respiratory outpatient clinic. The form prompts the patient to identify their questions and issues, provides a list of frequently asked questions and invites the patient to write down the issues they wish to discuss with their doctor. We wish to identify whether use of the form increases the extent to which patients perceive that their important issues are discussed in the consultation. We will also assess whether patients feel more able to raise these issues and get the outcome they wanted, their confidence to manage their condition and consultation length.

The study is a randomised controlled trial (RCT) with a sample size of 158 patients. On arrival at the clinic patients will be randomly allocated to either the intervention group (who will receive an agenda form) or to standard practice. Patient reported outcomes will be collected after the patient has seen the doctor and consultation times will be recorded by an independent observer outside the consultation room.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 165
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• United Kingdom
  • Cambridgeshire
    • Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom, CB2 0QQ
      • Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No
• Genders Eligible for Study: All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• have an outpatient appointment at one of the designated clinics
• are able to understand the Patient Information Sheet and complete the agenda form and the feedback form, or are accompanied by a person who meets this criteria and who is willing to complete the form on the patient's behalf
• willing and able to give informed consent for participation in the study

Exclusion Criteria:

• No further criteria apply

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Other
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: None (Open Label)

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Patient Agenda Form; Patient Agenda form: Patients receive an agenda form to use before their consultation.	Other: Patient agenda form; On arrival at the clinic patients are given an agenda form to prompt them to think about what issues they wished to discuss with their doctor. The form contains a prompt list of items they can tick, free space to write their own items, and a prompt to consider what is the most important issue for them and what they would like to happen before they leave their clinic appointment.
No Intervention: Usual care; Patients' appointment continues as usual.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Time Frame
The proportion of patients who, on leaving their outpatient appointment, strongly agree with the statement "My doctor discussed the issues that were important to me" where options are strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree.	Immediately after consultation with the doctor

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Time Frame
The proportion of patients who strongly agree with the statement "I got the outcome I wanted from my consultation" where options are strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree.	Immediately after consultation with the doctor
The proportion of patients who strongly agree with the statement "I felt able to raise issues that were important to me with my doctor" where options are strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree	Immediately after consultation with the doctor
Patient confidence to manage their condition following the consultation, rated on a scale of 0-10 where 0 equals no confidence and 10 equals maximum confidence	Immediately after consultation with the doctor
Length of consultation	Immediately after consultation with the doctor

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Jonathan P Fuld, MD ChB, PhD, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start: March 1, 2014
• Primary Completion (Actual): May 1, 2014
• Study Completion (Actual): May 1, 2014

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: February 8, 2018
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: February 8, 2018
• First Posted (Actual): February 15, 2018

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): February 15, 2018
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: February 8, 2018
• Last Verified: February 1, 2018

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: Humans; Patient satisfaction; Patient Outcome Assessment; Outcome Assessment (Health Care); Hospitalists; Outpatient Clinics, Hospital; Secondary care
• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Respiratory Tract Diseases
• Other Study ID Numbers: A092512