Decision aids (DAs) are tools to support patients make informed health decisions with their practitioner. They aim to improve patient knowledge of options, incorporate patient preferences and values, and increase patient involvement in health decision making. Increasingly, the debate about DAs concerns how they should be implemented in practice, with the view that DAs are superior to usual clinical care in facilitating health decisions. The authors challenge this view and suggest that DA research has focused on measures of decision process, leaving the effects on the outcome of the decision relatively unknown. It is still unclear in which conditions DAs are better for patient health and well-being than clinician-led decisions. The authors present a new randomized design to examine the effects of DA-supported patient choice on patient-centered outcomes to identify where DAs are best implemented in clinical practice. In this design, patients are randomized to 1 of 4 arms: intervention A, intervention B, choice of either intervention supported by a clinician, or choice of either intervention supported by a decision aid. Health and quality of life measured over the long term are presented as the primary outcomes. The authors propose that this design will allow the proper assessment of different modes of decision making.
Charles C., Gafni A., Whelan T.Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sci Med.1997;44(5):681—92.
2.
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—61.
3.
Godolphin W.The role of risk communication in shared decision making. BMJ.2003;327(7417):692—3.
4.
Whitney SN, McGuire AL, McCullough LBA typology of shared decision making, informed consent, and simple consent . Ann Intern Med.2004;140(1):54—9.
5.
O'Connor AM, Graham ID, Visser A.Implementing shared decision making in diverse health care systems: the role of patient decision aids. Patient Educ Couns.2005;57(3):247—9.
6.
O'Connor AM, Rostom A., Fiset V., et al. Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review. BMJ.1999;319(7212):731—4.
7.
O'Connor AM, Stacey D., Entwistle V., et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.2003 ;(2):CD001431.
8.
Thornton H., Edwards E., Baum M.Not to act is to act. BMJ Rapid Response. 14 October 2003.
9.
Coulter A.Patient information and shared decision-making in cancer care. Br J Cancer.2003;89(Suppl 1):S15—6.
10.
Kennedy ADOn what basis should the effectiveness of decision aids be judged?Health Expect. 2003;6(3):255—68.
Caplan RA, Posner KL, Cheney FWEffect of outcome on physician judgments of appropriateness of care. JAMA.1991;265(15): 1957—60.
15.
Feldman-Stewart D., Brundage MDChallenges for designing and implementing decision aids. Patient Educ Couns. 2004;54(3): 265—73.
16.
Svenson O.Differentiation and consolidation theory of human decision making: a frame of reference for the study of pre- and post decision processes. Acta Psychol (Amst)1992;80:143—68.
17.
Entwistle VA, Sowden AJ, Watt ISEvaluating interventions to promote patient involvement in decision-making: by what criteria should effectiveness be judged? J Health Serv Res Policy.1998;3(2):100—7.
18.
Barry MJ, Cherkin DC, YuChiao C., Fowler FJ, Skates S.A randomized trial of a multimedia shared decision-making program for men facing a treatment decision for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Dis ManagClin Outcomes. 1997;1(1):5—14.
19.
Bernstein SJ , Skarupski KA, Grayson CE, Starling MR, Bates ER, Eagle KAA randomized controlled trial of information-giving to patients referred for coronary angiography: effects on outcomes of care . Health Expect. 1998;1(1):50—61.
20.
Davison BJ, Degner LFEmpowerment of men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer. Cancer Nurs.1997;20(3):187—96.
21.
Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Weinstein J., Howe J., Ciol M., Mulley AG Jr.Involving patients in clinical decisions: impact of an interactive video program on use of back surgery. Med Care.2000; 38(9):959—69.
22.
Morgan MW, Deber RB, Llewellyn-Thomas HA, et al. Randomized, controlled trial of an interactive videodisc decision aid for patients with ischemic heart disease. J Gen Intern Med.2000; 15(10):685—93.
23.
Schwartz LM , Woloshin S., Black WC, Welch HGThe role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med.1997;127(11):966—72.
24.
Christensen-Szalanski JJDiscount functions and the measurement of patients' values: women's decisions during childbirth. Med Decis Making. 1984;4(1):47—58.
25.
Ubel PAIs information always a good thing? Helping patients make ``good'' decisions . Med Care.2002;40(9 Suppl):V39—44.
26.
Croyle RT, Hunt JRCoping with health threat: social influence processes in reactions to medical test results. J Pers Soc Psychol.1991;60(3):382—9.
27.
Lazarus RS, Folkman S.Stress, Appraisal and Coping. New York: Springer; 1984.
28.
Shanteau J., Dino G.Environmental stressor effects on creativity and decision making. In: Svenson O, Maule A, eds. Time Pressure and Stress in Human Judgment and Decision Making. New York: Plenum; 1993. p 293—308.
29.
Nelson WL, Han P., Fagerlin A., Stefanek M., Ubel P.Rethinking the objectives of decision aids: a call for conceptual clarity . Med Decis Making. 2007;27:609—18.
30.
Greenfield S., Kaplan S., Ware JEJr. Expanding patient involvement in care: effects on patient outcomes. Ann Intern Med.1985; 102(4):520—8.
31.
Kaplan SH, Greenfield S., Ware JEJr. Assessing the effects of physician-patient interactions on the outcomes of chronic disease. Med Care.1989;27(3 Suppl):S110—27.
32.
Bradley C.Patients' preferences and randomised trials. Lancet. 1996;347(9008):1118—9.
33.
Cooper KG, Bain C., Parkin DEComparison of microwave endometrial ablation and transcervical resection of the endometrium for treatment of heavy menstrual loss: a randomised trial . Lancet. 1999;354(9193):1859—63.
34.
Cooper KG, Parkin DE, Garratt AM, Grant AMTwo-year follow up of women randomised to medical management or transcervical resection of the endometrium for heavy menstrual loss: clinical and quality of life outcomes. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999 ; 106(3):258—65.
35.
Janevic MR, Janz NK, Dodge JA, et al. The role of choice in health education intervention trials: a review and case study. Soc Sci Med.2003 ;56:1581—94.
36.
Noel PH, Larme AC, Meyer J., Marsh G., Correa A., Pugh JAPatient choice in diabetes education curriculum: nutritional versus standard content for type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care.1998;21 (6):896—901.
37.
Rokke PD, Tomhave JA, Jocic Z.The role of client choice and target selection in self-management therapy for depression in older adults. Psychol Aging.1999;14(1):155—69.
38.
Rucker G.A two-stage trial design for testing treatment, self-selection and treatment preference effects. Stat Med.1989;8(4): 477—85.
