Suppr超能文献

一种支持房颤患者抗栓治疗共同决策的患者决策辅助工具:随机对照试验。

A patient decision aid to support shared decision-making on anti-thrombotic treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation: randomised controlled trial.

作者信息

Thomson Richard G, Eccles Martin P, Steen I Nick, Greenaway Jane, Stobbart Lynne, Murtagh Madeleine J, May Carl R

机构信息

Institute of Health and Society, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

出版信息

Qual Saf Health Care. 2007 Jun;16(3):216-23. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2006.018481.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy of a computerised decision aid in patients with atrial fibrillation making decisions on whether to take warfarin or aspirin therapy.

DESIGN

Two-armed open exploratory randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Two research clinics deriving participants from general practices in Northeast England.

PARTICIPANTS

109 patients with atrial fibrillation aged over 60.

INTERVENTIONS

Computerised decision aid applied in shared decision-making clinic compared to evidence-based paper guidelines applied as direct advice.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome measure was the decision conflict scale. Secondary outcome measures included anxiety, knowledge, decision-making preference, treatment decision, use of primary and secondary care services and health outcomes.

RESULTS

Decision conflict was lower in the computerised decision aid group immediately after the clinic; mean difference -0.18 (95% CI -0.34 to -0.01). Participants in this group not already on warfarin were much less likely to start warfarin than those in the guidelines arm (4/16, 25% compared to the guidelines group 15/16, 93.8%, RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.63).

CONCLUSIONS

Decision conflict was lower immediately following the use of a computerised decision aid in a shared decision-making consultation than immediately following direct doctor-led advice based on paper guidelines. Furthermore, participants in the computerised decision aid group were significantly much less likely to start warfarin than those in the guidelines arm. The results show that such an approach has a positive impact on decision conflict comparable to other studies of decision aids, but also reduces the uptake of a clinically effective treatment that may have important implications for health outcomes.

摘要

目的

确定一种计算机化决策辅助工具对于房颤患者在决定是否采用华法林或阿司匹林治疗时的效果。

设计

双臂开放性探索性随机对照试验。

地点

两家从英格兰东北部全科医疗中招募参与者的研究诊所。

参与者

109名年龄超过60岁的房颤患者。

干预措施

在共同决策诊所应用计算机化决策辅助工具,并与作为直接建议应用的循证纸质指南进行比较。

主要结局指标

主要结局指标为决策冲突量表。次要结局指标包括焦虑、知识、决策偏好、治疗决策、初级和二级医疗服务的使用情况以及健康结局。

结果

在诊后即刻,计算机化决策辅助工具组的决策冲突较低;平均差值为-0.18(95%置信区间为-0.34至-0.01)。该组中尚未使用华法林的参与者开始使用华法林的可能性远低于指南组(4/16,25%,而指南组为15/16,93.8%,相对危险度0.27,95%置信区间为0.11至0.63)。

结论

在共同决策咨询中使用计算机化决策辅助工具后即刻的决策冲突低于基于纸质指南由医生直接提供建议后的即刻冲突。此外,计算机化决策辅助工具组的参与者开始使用华法林的可能性显著低于指南组。结果表明,这种方法对决策冲突有积极影响,与其他决策辅助工具研究相当,但也降低了一种可能对健康结局有重要影响的临床有效治疗方法(华法林)的采用率。

相似文献

3
Preference-based antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation: implications for clinical decision making.
Med Decis Making. 2005 Sep-Oct;25(5):548-59. doi: 10.1177/0272989X05280558.
5
Development and validation of a decision aid for choosing among antithrombotic agents for atrial fibrillation.
Thromb Res. 2016 Sep;145:143-8. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2016.06.015. Epub 2016 Jun 16.
8
Predictors of warfarin use in atrial fibrillation patients in the inpatient setting.
Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2010;10(1):37-48. doi: 10.2165/11318870-000000000-00000.

引用本文的文献

2
Shared decision-making interventions in neuro-oncology practice: a systematic review.
J Neurooncol. 2025 Jun 23. doi: 10.1007/s11060-025-05141-7.
3
Systematic Review of Patient Decision Aids for Stroke Prevention Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation Management.
Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Oct 18;23(10):353. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2310353. eCollection 2022 Oct.
5
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jan 29;1(1):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub6.
7
An opponent model for agent-based shared decision-making via a genetic algorithm.
Front Psychol. 2023 Oct 3;14:1124734. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1124734. eCollection 2023.
8
9
Are shared decision making studies well enough described to be replicated? Secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review.
PLoS One. 2022 Mar 16;17(3):e0265401. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265401. eCollection 2022.

本文引用的文献

2
Tensions in public health policy: patient engagement, evidence-based public health and health inequalities.
Qual Saf Health Care. 2005 Dec;14(6):398-400. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2005.014175.
3
Doctor-patient interaction in a randomised controlled trial of decision-support tools.
Soc Sci Med. 2006 May;62(9):2267-78. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.10.011. Epub 2005 Nov 15.
4
Patients or research subjects? A qualitative study of participation in a randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention.
Patient Educ Couns. 2006 Aug;62(2):260-70. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2005.07.013. Epub 2005 Sep 21.
5
Preference-based antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation: implications for clinical decision making.
Med Decis Making. 2005 Sep-Oct;25(5):548-59. doi: 10.1177/0272989X05280558.
8
The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments.
Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):i14-8. doi: 10.1136/qhc.0100014...

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验