Beyond pros and cons - developing a patient decision aid to cultivate dialog to build relationships: insights from a qualitative study and decision aid development

Catherine H Yu, Calvin Ke, Aleksandra Jovicic, Susan Hall, Sharon E Straus, IP-SDM Team;, Paul Cantarutti, Karen Chu, Paul Frydrych, Noah Ivers, David Kaplan, Fok-Han Leung, John Maxted, Jeremy Rezmovitz, Sumeet Sodhi, Deanna Telner, Joanna Sale, Li Ka Shing, Dawn Stacey, Sharon Straus, Catherine H Yu, Calvin Ke, Aleksandra Jovicic, Susan Hall, Sharon E Straus, IP-SDM Team;, Paul Cantarutti, Karen Chu, Paul Frydrych, Noah Ivers, David Kaplan, Fok-Han Leung, John Maxted, Jeremy Rezmovitz, Sumeet Sodhi, Deanna Telner, Joanna Sale, Li Ka Shing, Dawn Stacey, Sharon Straus

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.

Keywords: Diabetes mellitus; Interprofessional care; Medical informatics; Patient decision aid; Patient education; Priority-setting; Qualitative methods; Shared decision-making; Toolkit development; User-centred design.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Dr. SE Straus is supported by a Tier 1 Canada Research Chair. Dr. J. Sale is supported by a New Investigator Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

References

    1. Montori VM, Gafni A, Charles C. A shared treatment decision-making approach between patients with chronic conditions and their clinicians: the case of diabetes. Health Expect. 2006;9:25–36. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2006.00359.x.
    1. Serrano V, Rodriguez-Gutierrez R, Hargraves I, Gionfriddo MR, Tamhane S, Montori VM. Shared decision-making in the care of individuals with diabetes. Diabet Med. 2016;33(6):742–751. doi: 10.1111/dme.13143.
    1. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model. Soc Sci Med. 1999;49(5):651–661. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00145-8.
    1. Joosten EA, DeFuentes-Merillas L, de Weert GH, Sensky T, van der Staak CP, de Jong CA. Systematic review of the effects of shared decision-making on patient satisfaction, treatment adherence and health status. Psychother Psychosom. 2008;77:219–226. doi: 10.1159/000126073.
    1. van Weert JC, van Munster BC, Sanders R, Spijker R, Hooft L, Jansen J. Decision aids to help older people make health decisions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016;16:45. doi: 10.1186/s12911-016-0281-8.
    1. Peek ME, Wilson SC, Gorawara-Bhat R, Odoms-Young A, Quinn MT, Chin MH. Barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making among African-Americans with diabetes. J Gen Intern Med. 2009;24(10):1135–1139. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-1047-0.
    1. D'Amour D, Oandasan I. Interprofessionality as the field of interprofessional practice and interprofessional education: an emerging concept. J Interprof Care. 2005;19(Suppl 1):8–20. doi: 10.1080/13561820500081604.
    1. van Dam HA, van der Horst F, van den Borne B. Provider-patient interaction in diabetes care: effects on patient self-care and outcomes. A systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2003;51(1):17–28. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(02)00122-2.
    1. Shojania KG, Ranjii SR, McDonald KM. Effects of quality improvement strategies for type 2 diabetes on glycemic control: a meta-regression analysis. JAMA. 2006;296(4):427–440. doi: 10.1001/jama.296.4.427.
    1. Tricco AC, Ivers NM, Grimshaw JM, Moher D, Turner L, Galipeau J, et al. Effectiveness of quality improvement strategies on the management of diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2012;379(9833):2252–2261. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60480-2.
    1. MacGregor K, Handley M, Wong S, Sharifi C, Gjeltema K, Schillinger D, et al. Behavior-change action plans in primary care: a feasibility study of clinicians. J Am Board Fam Med. 2006;19(3):215–223. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.19.3.215.
    1. Coyne I, O'Mathúna DP, Gibson F, Shields L, Sheaf G. Interventions for promoting participation in shared decision-making for children with cancer. Cochrane Libr. 2011;2.
    1. Duncan E, Best C, Hagen S. Shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;1.
    1. Legare F, Ratte S, Stacey D, Kryworuchko J, Gravel K, Graham ID, et al. Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;5.
    1. Corser W, Holmes-Rovner M, Lein C, Gossain V. Shared decision-making primary care intervention for type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2007;33(4):700–708. doi: 10.1177/0145721707304086.
    1. Yu CH, Stacey D, Sale J, Hall S, Kaplan DM, Ivers N, et al. Designing and evaluating an interprofessional shared decision-making and goal-setting decision aid for patients with diabetes in clinical care--systematic decision aid development and study protocol. Implementat Sci. 2014;9:16. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-9-16.
    1. Graham ID, Logan J, Harrison MB, Straus SE, Tetroe J, Caswell W, et al. Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2006;26(1):13–24. doi: 10.1002/chp.47.
    1. 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.
    1. Kastner M, Straus SE. Application of the knowledge-to-action and Medical Research Council frameworks in the development of an osteoporosis clinical decision support tool. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65(11):1163–1170. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.04.011.
    1. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–357. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042.
    1. Elwyn G, O'Connor A, Stacey D, et al. Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process. BMJ. 2006;333:417. doi: 10.1136/.
    1. Kvale S. InterViews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications; 1996.
    1. Marshall MN. Sampling for qualitative research. Fam Pract. 1996;13(6):522–526. doi: 10.1093/fampra/13.6.522.
    1. Michie S, Johnston M, Abraham C, Lawton R, Parker D, Walker A. Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14(1):26–33. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2004.011155.
    1. Cane J, O'Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7:37. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-37.
    1. Canadian Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Expert Committee Canadian Diabetes Association 2013 clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and Management of Diabetes in Canada. Can J Diabetes. 2013;37(suppl 1):S1–S212.
    1. Reissman CK. Narrative analysis. Newbury Park CA: Sage Publications; 1993.
    1. Czarniawska B. Narratives in social science research. London: Sage Publications; 2004.
    1. Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008;62(1):107–115. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x.
    1. Légaré F, Stacey D, Briere N, Desroches S, Dumont S, et al. A conceptual framework for interprofessional shared decision making in home care: protocol for a feasibility study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11(1):23. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-23.
    1. Wilson PW, D'Agostino RB, Levy D, Belanger AM, Silbershatz H, Kannel WB. Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. Circulation. 1998;97(18):1837–1847. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.97.18.1837.
    1. D'Agostino RB, Sr, Vasan RS, Pencina MJ, Wolf PA, Cobain M, Massaro JM, et al. General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham heart study. Circulation. 2008;117(6):743–753. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.699579.
    1. Stevens RJ, Kothari V, Adler AI, Stratton IM. The UKPDS risk engine: a model for the risk of coronary heart disease in Type II diabetes (UKPDS 56) Clin Sci (London, England : 1979) 2001;101(6):671–679. doi: 10.1042/cs1010671.
    1. Kothari V, Stevens RJ, Adler AI, Stratton IM, Manley SE, Neil HA, et al. UKPDS 60: risk of stroke in type 2 diabetes estimated by the UK prospective diabetes study risk engine. Stroke. 2002;33(7):1776–1781. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000020091.07144.C7.
    1. Tanaka S, Iimuro S, Yamashita H, Katayama S, Akanuma Y, Yamada N, et al. Predicting macro- and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: the Japan diabetes complications study/the Japanese elderly diabetes intervention trial risk engine. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(5):1193–1199. doi: 10.2337/dc12-0958.
    1. Keane WF, Zhang Z, Lyle PA, Cooper ME, de Zeeuw D, Grunfeld JP, et al. Risk scores for predicting outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy: the RENAAL study. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006;1(4):761–767. doi: 10.2215/CJN.01381005.
    1. Tesfaye S, Chaturvedi N, Eaton SE, Ward JD, Manes C, Ionescu-Tirgoviste C, et al. Vascular risk factors and diabetic neuropathy. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(4):341–350. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa032782.
    1. Holman RR, Paul SK, Bethel MA, Matthews DR, Neil HA. 10-year follow-up of intensive glucose control in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(15):1577–1589. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0806470.
    1. U.S Department of Health and Human Services. Applying Human Factors and Usability Engineering to Medical Devices: Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff. 2016:1–2,15.
    1. Nielsen J. Enhancing the explanatory power of usability heuristics. Proc ACM CHI'94 Conf. 1994;Boston, MA, April 24–28:152–158.
    1. Kushniruk AW, Patel VL. Cognitive and usability engineering methods for the evaluation of clinical information systems. J Biomed Inform. 2004;37(1):56–76. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2004.01.003.
    1. NIELSEN JAKOB. Usability Engineering. 1993. The Usability Engineering Lifecycle; pp. 71–114.
    1. Elwyn G, Scholl I, Tietbohl C, Mann M, Edwards AG, Clay C, et al. “Many miles to go ...”: a systematic review of the implementation of patient decision support interventions into routine clinical practice. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13 Suppl 2:S14.
    1. Legare F, Stacey D, Turcotte S, Cossi MJ, Kryworuchko J, Graham ID, et al. Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(9):Cd006732.
    1. Makoul G, Clayman ML. An integrative model of shared decision making in medical encounters. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;60(3):301–312. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2005.06.010.
    1. Russell-Minda E, Jutai J, Strong G, Campbell K. An evidence-based review of the research on typeface legibility for readers with low vision. Clear Print. 2006.
    1. Nielsen J. Iterative user-interface design. Computer. 1993;26:32–41. doi: 10.1109/2.241424.
    1. Nelson KA. Consumer decision making and image theory: understanding value-laden decisions. JCP. 2004;14(1):28–40.
    1. Beach L, Mitchell T. Image theory: principles, goals, and plans in decision making. Acta Psychol. 1987;66(3):201–220. doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(87)90034-5.
    1. Tamhane S, Rodriguez-Gutierrez R, Hargraves I, Montori VM. Shared decision-making in diabetes care. Curr Diab Rep. 2015;15(12):112. doi: 10.1007/s11892-015-0688-0.
    1. Karnieli-Miller O, Eisikovits Z. Physician as partner or salesman? Shared decision-making in real-time encounters. Soc Sci Med (1982) 2009;69(1):1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.04.030.
    1. Strull WM, Lo B, Charles G. Do patients want to participate in medical decision making? JAMA. 1984;252(21):2990–2994. doi: 10.1001/jama.1984.03350210038026.
    1. Chewning B, Bylund CL, Shah B, Arora NK, Gueguen JA, Makoul G. Patient preferences for shared decisions: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;86(1):9–18. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.02.004.
    1. Eliacin J, Salyers MP, Kukla M, Matthias MS. Factors influencing patients' preferences and perceived involvement in shared decision-making in mental health care. J Mental Health (Abingdon, England) 2015;24(1):24–28. doi: 10.3109/09638237.2014.954695.
    1. Stewart M. Towards a global definition of patient centred care: the patient should be the judge of patient centred care. BMJ. 2001;322(7284):444–445. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7284.444.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться