Randomized, controlled trial of an interactive videodisc decision aid for patients with ischemic heart disease
- 1 October 2000
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Springer Nature in Journal of General Internal Medicine
- Vol. 15 (10) , 685-693
- https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.91139.x
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of the Ischemic Heart Disease Shared Decision-Making Program (IHD SDP) an interactive videodisc designed to assist patients in the decision-making process involving treatment choices for ischemic heart disease, on patient decision-making. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: The Toronto Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred forty ambulatory patients with ischemic heart disease amenable to elective revascularization and ongoing medical therapy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was patient satisfaction with the decision-making process. This was measured using the 12-item Decision-Making Process Questionnaire that was developed and validated in a randomized trial of the benign prostatic hyperplasia SDP. Secondary outcomes included patient knowledge (measured using 20 questions about knowledge deemed necessary for an informed treatment decision), treatment decision, patient-angiographer agreement on decision, and general health scores. Outcomes were measured at the time of treatment decision and/or at 6 months follow-up. Shared decision-making program scores were similar for the intervention and control group (71% and 70%, respectively; 95% confidence interval [CI] for 1% difference, −3% to 7%). The intervention group had higher knowledge scores (75% vs 62%; 95% CI for 13% difference, 8% to 18%). The intervention group chose to pursue revascularization less often (58% vs 75% for the controls; 95% CI for 17% difference, 4% to 31%). At 6 months, 52% of the intervention group and 66% of the controls had undergone revascularization (95% CI for 14% difference, 0% to 28%). General health and angina scores were not different between the groups at 6 months. Exposure to the IHD SDP resulted in more patient-angiographer disagreement about treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in satisfaction with decision-making process scores between the IHD SDP and usual practice groups. The IHD SDP patients were more knowledgeable, underwent less revascularization (interventional therapies), and demonstrated increased patient decision-making autonomy without apparent impact on quality of life.Keywords
This publication has 29 references indexed in Scilit:
- A randomized controlled trial of information‐giving to patients referred for coronary angiography: effects on outcomes of careHealth Expectations, 1998
- What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making?Archives of internal medicine (1960), 1996
- Patient Reactions to a Program Designed to Facilitate Patient Participation in Treatment Decisions for Benign Prostatic HyperplasiaMedical Care, 1995
- The Effect of a Shared Decisionmaking Program on Rates of Surgery for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Pilot ResultsMedical Care, 1995
- A Randomized Trial Comparing Coronary Angioplasty with Coronary Bypass SurgeryNew England Journal of Medicine, 1994
- Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists CollaborationPublished by Elsevier ,1994
- Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): In-hospital results and 1-year follow-upJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1993
- Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trialThe Lancet, 1993
- The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Medical Care, 1992
- Adding Insult to InjuryNew England Journal of Medicine, 1983