Dataset Information

Pilot trial of iBDecide: Evaluating an online tool to facilitate shared decision making for adolescents and young adults with ulcerative colitis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

This pilot, randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the usability, among adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with ulcerative colitis (UC), of a web-based tool ('iBDecide') designed to facilitate shared decision making (SDM).

Methods

AYAs with UC (n = 35) were randomized to intervention (iBDecide, n = 14) and control (n = 12) arms before a scheduled clinic visit. We measured the usability of iBDecide, SDM, preferred decision-making style, decision conflict and intervention use.

Results

Participants in the intervention group found iBDecide easy to use and agreed that it made them feel ready to participate in decision making and that they would use it to prepare for appointments. There were 130 visits to iBDecide, lasting on average 3 min, 41 s. The medication and nutrition trackers were among the most-viewed pages. Pages specifically designed to facilitate SDM were viewed only four times. Across groups, too few participants reported making decisions during clinic visits for decision-related measures to be reported.

Conclusions

This pilot trial provides evidence for the usability of iBDecide and guidance for developing a larger-scale trial of a combined web-based and in-clinic SDM intervention. Overall, iBDecide shows promise in engaging AYAs with UC in SDM and condition management.

Patient or public contribution

Patients, specifically AYAs with UC, and healthcare providers were involved in the design of this study's intervention, iBDecide. Additionally, the research team, from study conception to manuscript writing, included a young adult with inflammatory bowel disease.

Clinical trial registration

This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04207008).

SUBMITTER: Matula KA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9700187 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pilot trial of iBDecide: Evaluating an online tool to facilitate shared decision making for adolescents and young adults with ulcerative colitis.

Matula Kelly A KA Minar Philip P Daraiseh Nancy M NM Lin Li L Recker Marlee M Lipstein Ellen A EA

Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy 20220926 6

<h4>Introduction</h4>This pilot, randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the usability, among adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with ulcerative colitis (UC), of a web-based tool ('iBDecide') designed to facilitate shared decision making (SDM).<h4>Methods</h4>AYAs with UC (n = 35) were randomized to intervention (iBDecide, n = 14) and control (n = 12) arms before a scheduled clinic visit. We measured the usability of iBDecide, SDM, preferred decision-making style, decision conflict and in ...[more]

PMID: 36161973

Similar Datasets

Project description:AIM:The aim of this study was to explore shared decision-making among residents, their families and staff to determine relevant strategies to support shared decision-making in long-term care (LTC). BACKGROUND:Meaningful engagement of long-term care home (LTCH) residents and their families in care decisions is key in the provision of quality of care. Shared decision-making is an interprofessional approach to increasing resident and family engagement in care decisions which can lead to higher quality decisions, more relevant care interventions and greater resident, family, and staff satisfaction. Despite these advantages, shared decision-making has not been widely implemented in practice in LTC. METHODS:The study took place in one LTCH in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. A qualitative descriptive design was used to explore how residents, family members and staff described how they collaborate when making decisions concerning resident care, and their perceptions of facilitators and challenges to a collaborative approach to decision-making. Individual interviews were conducted with nine participants: residents, families and staff. Data were analysed using content and thematic analysis. FINDINGS:Four main themes that described resident, family and staff perspectives of shared decision-making were as follows: (a) oral communication pathways for information sharing; (b) supporting resident decision-making autonomy; (c) relational aspects of care facilitate shared decision-making; and (d) lack of effective communication creates barriers to shared decision-making. CONCLUSION:As the demand for LTC continues to increase, it is crucial that healthcare providers engage in collaborative, relational practices that foster high-quality resident care. While a relational approach to care can facilitate shared decision-making, there are opportunities to further cultivate shared decision-making in LTCHs through more effective communication and collaboration. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:Understanding how information is shared and decisions are made can facilitate shared decision-making in LTCHs. The strategies identified from this study could be further co-developed and implemented in LTCHs.

Project description:ObjectivePatient values and preferences are an important component to decision making when tradeoffs exist that impact quality of life, such as tradeoffs between stroke prevention and hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) contemplating anticoagulant therapy. Our objective is to describe the development of an Atrial Fibrillation Guideline Support Tool (AFGuST) to assist the process of integrating patients' preferences into this decision.Materials and methodsCHA2DS2VASc and HAS-BLED were used to calculate risks for stroke and hemorrhage. We developed a Markov decision analytic model as a computational engine to integrate patient-specific risk for stroke and hemorrhage and individual patient values for relevant outcomes in decisions about anticoagulant therapy.ResultsIndividual patient preferences for health-related outcomes may have greater or lesser impact on the choice of optimal antithrombotic therapy, depending upon the balance of patient-specific risks for ischemic stroke and major bleeding. These factors have been incorporated into patient-tailored booklets which, along with an informational video, were developed through an iterative process with clinicians and patient focus groups.Key limitationsCurrent risk prediction models for hemorrhage, such as the HAS-BLED, used in the AFGuST, do not incorporate all potentially significant risk factors. Novel oral anticoagulant agents recently approved for use in the United States, Canada, and Europe have not been included in the AFGuST. Rather, warfarin has been used as a conservative proxy for all oral anticoagulant therapy.ConclusionsWe present a proof of concept that a patient-tailored decision-support tool could bridge the gap between guidelines and practice by incorporating individual patient's stroke and bleeding risks and their values for major bleeding events and stroke to facilitate a shared decision making process. If effective, the AFGuST could be used as an adjunct to published guidelines to enhance patient-centered conversations about the anticoagulation management.

Project description:Reports exist regarding a gradual approach to the care of patients with differences of sexual development. Each patient and family have different values and styles of learning that have to be taken into account. The goals of care should include education about the condition, counseling of the patient and family, and a complete outlining of treatment options. Motivated by a call from the 2010 Health Reform Law for the use of shared decision-making tools and the emphasis placed on these issues by the DSD Consensus Statement, we sought to develop and implement such tools for the DSD population.1-3 Thus, we developed an organized checklist for providers to share with a patients and families affected by CAIS, beginning with the initial visit. The development of the document enlisted input from physicians, clinical coordinator, advocacy groups and affected individuals. It allows providers to explain the process of care and develop a plan for delivery of that care over multiple visits spanning six months or more. The checklist is divided into five sections: 1) An overview addressing how much information is desired and in what manner the patient prefers to obtain information; 2) A preferred words list so that the patient can choose nomenclature that is most comfortable; 3) A list of topics to review over the course of multiple visits; 4) A list of questions to be answered by the providers or other resources over time, and; 5) A list of concerns to be addressed before surgical intervention is considered. An organized approach to long-term delivery of compassionate care and accurate information can be facilitated for patients with CAIS by the use of a shared decision-making checklist. Documentation of the care delivery process can stimulate referral to peer support and promote fully informed consent for treatment decisions. The use of the checklist should encourage trust in the provider, as well as aid in identifying and addressing stressors for the patient and family. The checklist will be updated and revised as new treatments and advanced technology emerges.

Dataset Information

Pilot trial of iBDecide: Evaluating an online tool to facilitate shared decision making for adolescents and young adults with ulcerative colitis.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Patient or public contribution

Clinical trial registration

Publications

Pilot trial of iBDecide: Evaluating an online tool to facilitate shared decision making for adolescents and young adults with ulcerative colitis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets