Arnold Suzanne V, Decker Carole, Ahmad Homaa, Olabiyi Olawale, Mundluru Surya, Reid Kimberly J, Soto Gabriel E, Gansert Sarah, Spertus John A
Mid America Heart Institute of Saint Luke's Hospital, Kansas City, MO 64111, USA.
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2008 Sep;1(1):21-8. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.108.791863.
Standard consent forms result in highly variable communication between patients and physicians. To enhance the consent process and facilitate shared decision making, we developed a World Wide Web-based program, PREDICT (Patient Refined Expectations for Deciding Invasive Cardiac Treatments), to systematically embed patient-specific estimates of death, bleeding, and restenosis into individualized percutaneous coronary intervention informed consent documents. We then compared patients' experiences with informed consent before and after implementation of PREDICT.
Between August 2006 and May 2007, patients undergoing nonemergent cardiac catheterization who received the original consent form (n=142) were interviewed and compared with those who received the PREDICT consent form (n=193). Hierarchical modified Poisson regression models were used to adjust for clustering of patients within physicians. Compared with the original consent group, those in the PREDICT group reported higher rates of reading the consent form (72% versus 44%, relative risk [RR] 1.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24 to 2.16), increased perception of shared decision making (67% versus 45%, RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.22), and decreased anxiety (35% versus 55%, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.91). Although there were no differences between groups in patients' ability to name complications of percutaneous coronary intervention, among patients who identified either death or bleeding as a potential complication, more patients in the PREDICT group recalled being informed of their estimated risk of that complication (death: 85% versus 62%, RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.82; bleeding: 92% versus 71%, RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.56).
In this preliminary, single-center experience, individualized consent forms with patient-specific risks were associated with improved participation in the consent process, reduced anxiety, and better risk recall. PREDICT is one potential strategy for improving the current practice of obtaining informed consent for percutaneous coronary intervention.
标准的同意书导致患者与医生之间的沟通差异很大。为了加强同意过程并促进共同决策,我们开发了一个基于万维网的程序PREDICT(患者对侵入性心脏治疗决策的精确期望),以将患者特异性的死亡、出血和再狭窄估计值系统地纳入个体化经皮冠状动脉介入治疗知情同意文件中。然后,我们比较了实施PREDICT前后患者对知情同意的体验。
在2006年8月至2007年5月期间,对接受原始同意书的非急诊心脏导管插入术患者(n = 142)进行访谈,并与接受PREDICT同意书的患者(n = 193)进行比较。使用分层修正泊松回归模型对医生治疗的患者群集进行校正。与原始同意书组相比,PREDICT组的患者报告阅读同意书的比例更高(72%对44%,相对风险[RR]1.64,95%置信区间[CI]1.24至2.16),对共同决策的认知增加(67%对45%,RR 1.48,95%CI 0.99至2.22),焦虑减少(35%对\55%,RR 0.70,95%CI 0.53至0.91)。虽然两组患者说出经皮冠状动脉介入治疗并发症的能力没有差异,但在将死亡或出血识别为潜在并发症的患者中,PREDICT组中有更多患者回忆起被告知其该并发症的估计风险(死亡:85%对62%,RR 1.37,95%CI 1.03至1.82;出血:92%对71%,RR 1.28,95%CI 1.06至1.56)。
在这项初步的单中心研究中,包含患者特异性风险的个体化同意书与同意过程中更好的参与度、更低的焦虑和更好的风险回忆相关。PREDICT是改善当前经皮冠状动脉介入治疗知情同意做法的一种潜在策略。