Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, Sydney Health Literacy Lab, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Faculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, Wiser Healthcare, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Med Decis Making. 2023 Aug;43(6):642-655. doi: 10.1177/0272989X231184461. Epub 2023 Jul 5.
BACKGROUND: Despite widespread use, there are few studies evaluating the consumer Choosing Wisely questions. METHODS: We evaluated the impact of the Choosing Wisely questions on consumers' decision-making outcomes. Adults living in Australia were presented with a hypothetical low-value care scenario. Using a 2×2×2 between-subjects factorial design, they were randomized to either the Choosing Wisely questions ("Questions"), a shared decision-making (SDM) preparation video ("Video"), both interventions, or control (no intervention). Primary outcomes were 1) self-efficacy to ask questions and be involved in decision-making and 2) intention to engage in SDM. RESULTS: A total of 1,439 participants (45.6% with "inadequate" health literacy) were eligible and included in the analysis. Intention to engage in SDM was higher in people randomized to the Video (mean difference [MD] = 0.24 [scale 0-6], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.14, 0.35), Questions (MD = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.22), and both interventions (MD = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.23-0.44, < 0.001, = 0.28) compared with control. Combining interventions had a greater impact than presenting the Questions alone (MD = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.32; < 0.001). Those who received the Video or both interventions reported lower intention to follow the low-value treatment plan without further questioning (all < 0.05) and more positive attitudes toward SDM (all < 0.05) compared with control. Intervention acceptability was high in all study arms (>80%), but proactive access was low (1.7%-20.8%). Compared with control, participants who received one or both interventions asked more questions that mapped to the Choosing Wisely questions (all < .001). There were no main effects of either intervention on self-efficacy or knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: The Choosing Wisely questions and a video to promote SDM may improve intention to engage in SDM and support patients in identifying questions that align with the Choosing Wisely campaign (with some additional benefits of the video intervention). TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR376477. HIGHLIGHTS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial online with adults living in Australia to test the effectiveness of the consumer Choosing Wisely questions and a shared decision-making (SDM) preparation video.Both interventions improved intention to engage in SDM and supported participants to identify questions that align with the Choosing Wisely campaign.There were some additional benefits of the Video intervention in reducing willingness to accept low-value treatment for low-back pain without asking questions; however, neither intervention changed participants' self-efficacy to ask questions and be involved in decision-making nor affected perceptions of preparedness to engage in SDM or knowledge of rights to be involved in health care decision-making.The simple, low-cost nature of the interventions may make them appropriate for implementation within a suite of approaches to address low-value care at a population level.
背景:尽管广泛使用,但很少有研究评估消费者明智选择问题。
方法:我们评估了明智选择问题对消费者决策结果的影响。居住在澳大利亚的成年人被提供了一个低价值护理方案的假设情景。使用 2×2×2 组间因子设计,他们被随机分配到明智选择问题(“问题”)、共享决策(SDM)准备视频(“视频”)、两种干预措施或对照组(无干预)。主要结果是 1)提问和参与决策的自我效能感,2)参与 SDM 的意愿。
结果:共有 1439 名符合条件的参与者(45.6%的人有“不足”的健康素养)纳入分析。与对照组相比,被分配到视频组的人(平均差异[MD]=0.24[范围 0-6],95%置信区间[CI]:0.14,0.35)、问题组(MD=0.12,95% CI:0.01,0.22)和两个干预组(MD=0.33,95% CI:0.23-0.44, < 0.001, = 0.28)参与 SDM 的意愿更高。与单独呈现问题相比,联合干预的效果更大(MD=0.22,95% CI:0.11,0.32; < 0.001)。与对照组相比,接受视频或两种干预的人表示不太愿意在没有进一步询问的情况下遵循低价值治疗方案(均 < 0.05),并且对 SDM 的态度更加积极(均 < 0.05)。所有研究组的干预措施接受度都很高(>80%),但主动参与度较低(1.7%-20.8%)。与对照组相比,接受一种或两种干预的参与者提出了更多与明智选择问题相匹配的问题(均 < 0.001)。两种干预措施都没有对自我效能或知识产生主要影响。
结论:明智选择问题和促进 SDM 的视频可能会提高参与 SDM 的意愿,并支持患者识别与明智选择活动相匹配的问题(视频干预还有一些额外的好处)。
试验注册:ANZCTR376477。
重点:我们在澳大利亚进行了一项在线随机对照试验,以测试消费者明智选择问题和共享决策(SDM)准备视频的有效性。两种干预措施都提高了参与 SDM 的意愿,并支持参与者识别与明智选择活动相匹配的问题。视频干预在减少对低价值治疗的接受意愿方面还有一些额外的好处,即在没有提问的情况下接受腰痛治疗,但两种干预措施都没有改变参与者提问和参与决策的自我效能感,也没有影响他们对参与 SDM 的准备程度或对参与医疗保健决策的权利的看法。干预措施简单、低成本的性质可能使它们适合在解决低价值医疗保健问题的一整套方法中实施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-2-1
Health Lit Res Pract. 2019-10-3
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010-5-12
JAMA Netw Open. 2025-7-1
JAMA Health Forum. 2022-6-3
BMJ Qual Saf. 2020-12-24
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-7-19