Doll Jacob A, Jones W Schuyler, Lokhnygina Yuliya, Culpepper Sara, Parks Robin L, Calhoun Christy, Au David H, Patel Manesh R
Section of Cardiology (J.A.D.), VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA.
Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle (J.A.D.).
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019 Feb;12(2):e005244. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.005244.
Background Guidelines recommend patient engagement in shared decision-making regarding coronary revascularization, but studies demonstrate poor patient understanding of risks, benefits, and alternatives. Effective strategies are needed to integrate informed patient preferences into clinical care, particularly for patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography. Methods and Results We developed a web-based decision aid to educate patients and survey their treatment preferences before angiography. We compared knowledge, attitudes, and preferences of 203 patients with and without use of the decision aid. In a pilot cluster-randomized study, cardiologists were assigned to receive versus not receive patient preferences, with subsequent assessment of treatment decisions. The median age of participants was 64 years, 62% were men, 74% were white, and a similar number had acute presentation (49% non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina) and stable presentation (51% stable angina or atypical symptoms). Most patients preferred treatment with percutaneous coronary intervention compared with either medical therapy alone (63% versus 21%) or coronary artery bypass graft surgery (81% versus 7%). The decision aid was associated with improved performance on a 6-item knowledge scale (mean, 2.7 versus 2.2 questions correct; P<0.01) and greater interest in shared decision-making but not an overall change in patient preferences. The pilot cluster-randomized study demonstrated the feasibility of integrating patient preference information into clinical care, although providing preferences to the clinicians did not improve concordance between preference and treatment. Conclusions A web-based decision aid was associated with improved patient knowledge and greater desire to participate in shared decision-making for coronary revascularization. Most patients preferred percutaneous coronary intervention to either medical therapy alone or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Further investigation is needed to determine the impact of patient preferences on clinical decision-making and outcomes. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02272062.
背景 指南建议患者参与冠状动脉血运重建的共同决策,但研究表明患者对风险、益处及替代方案的理解不足。需要有效的策略将患者明智的偏好纳入临床护理,尤其是对于接受诊断性冠状动脉造影的患者。方法与结果 我们开发了一个基于网络的决策辅助工具,用于在血管造影术前对患者进行教育并调查他们的治疗偏好。我们比较了203名使用和未使用该决策辅助工具的患者的知识、态度和偏好。在一项试点整群随机研究中,心脏病专家被分配接受或不接受患者偏好,随后对治疗决策进行评估。参与者的中位年龄为64岁,62%为男性,74%为白人,急性发病(49%非ST段抬高型心肌梗死或不稳定型心绞痛)和稳定发病(51%稳定型心绞痛或非典型症状)的人数相近。与单独药物治疗(63%对21%)或冠状动脉旁路移植术(81%对7%)相比,大多数患者更倾向于经皮冠状动脉介入治疗。该决策辅助工具与6项知识量表上的表现改善相关(平均正确回答问题数,2.7对2.2;P<0.01),且对共同决策的兴趣更大,但患者偏好没有总体变化。试点整群随机研究证明了将患者偏好信息纳入临床护理的可行性,尽管向临床医生提供偏好并未提高偏好与治疗之间的一致性。结论 基于网络的决策辅助工具与患者知识的改善以及参与冠状动脉血运重建共同决策的更大意愿相关。与单独药物治疗或冠状动脉旁路移植术相比,大多数患者更倾向于经皮冠状动脉介入治疗。需要进一步研究以确定患者偏好对临床决策和结果的影响。临床试验注册网址:https://www.clinicaltrials.gov。唯一标识符:NCT02272062。