Correction to: Making sense of diabetes medication decisions: a mixed methods cluster randomized trial using a conversation aid intervention.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kunneman M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9813200 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Correction to: Making sense of diabetes medication decisions: a mixed methods cluster randomized trial using a conversation aid intervention.
Kunneman Marleen M Branda Megan E ME Ridgeway Jennifer L JL Tiedje Kristina K May Carl R CR Linzer Mark M Inselman Jonathan J Buffington Angela L H ALH Coffey Jordan J Boehm Deborah D Deming James J Dick Sara S van Houten Holly H LeBlanc Annie A Liesinger Juliette J Lima Janet J Nordeen Joanne J Pencille Laurie L Poplau Sara S Reed Steven S Vannelli Anna A Yost Kathleen J KJ Ziegenfuss Jeanette Y JY Smith Steven A SA Montori Victor M VM Shah Nilay D ND
Endocrine 20230101 1
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeTo determine the effectiveness of a shared decision-making (SDM) tool versus guideline-informed usual care in translating evidence into primary care, and to explore how use of the tool changed patient perspectives about diabetes medication decision making.MethodsIn this mixed methods multicenter cluster randomized trial, we included patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and their primary care clinicians. We compared usual care with or without a within-encounter SDM conversation aid. We assessed participant-reported decisions made and quality of SDM (knowledge, satisfaction, and decisional conflict), clinical outcomes, adherence, and observer-based patient involvement in decision-making (OPTION12-scale). We used semi-structured interviews with patients to understand their perspectives.ResultsWe enrolled 350 patients and 99 clinicians from 20 practices and interviewed 26 patients. Use of the conversation aid increased post-encounter patient knowledge (correct answers, 52% vs. 45%, p = 0.02) and clinician involvement of patients (Mean between-arm difference in OPTION12, 7.3 (95% CI 3, 12); p = 0.003). There were no between-arm differences in treatment choice, patient or clinician satisfaction, encounter length, medication adherence, or glycemic control. Qualitative analyses highlighted differences in how clinicians involved patients in decision making, with intervention patients noting how clinicians guided them through conversations using factors important to them.ConclusionsUsing an SDM conversation aid improved patient knowledge and involvement in SDM without impacting treatment choice, encounter length, medication adherence or improved diabetes control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Future interventions may need to focus specifically on patients with signs of poor treatment fit.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01502891.
| S-EPMC8428215 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivePatients diagnosed with advanced larynx cancer face a decisional process in which they can choose between radiotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, or a total laryngectomy with adjuvant radiotherapy. Clinicians do not always agree on the best clinical treatment, making the decisional process for patients a complex problem.MethodsGuided by the International Patient Decision Aid (PDA) Standards, we followed three developmental phases for which we held semi-structured in-depth interviews with patients and physicians, thinking-out-loud sessions, and a study-specific questionnaire. Audio-recorded interviews were verbatim transcribed, thematically coded, and analyzed. Phase 1 consisted of an evaluation of the decisional needs and the regular counseling process; phase 2 tested the comprehensibility and usability of the PDA; and phase 3 beta tested the feasibility of the PDA.ResultsPatients and doctors agreed on the need for development of a PDA. Major revisions were conducted after phase 1 to improve the readability and replace the majority of text with video animations. Patients and physicians considered the PDA to be a major improvement to the current counseling process.ConclusionThis study describes the development of a comprehensible and easy-to-use online patient decision aid for advanced larynx cancer, which was found satisfactory by patients and physicians (available on www.treatmentchoice.info). The outcome of the interviews underscores the need for better patient counseling. The feasibility and satisfaction among newly diagnosed patients as well as doctors will need to be proven. To this end, we started a multicenter trial evaluating the PDA in clinical practice (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03292341).Level of evidenceNA Laryngoscope, 129:2733-2739, 2019.
| S-EPMC6899876 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In a retrospective and prospective audit of 55 children presenting to the paediatric assessment unit of a district general hospital with fever and petechial rash, 9% had significant bacterial sepsis. The "ILL criteria" (irritability, lethargy, low capillary refill) for the management of children with fever and petechiae are proposed.
| S-EPMC1718572 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 has ruptured routines and caused breakdowns in what had been conventional practice and custom: everything from going to work and school and shopping in the supermarket to socializing with friends and taking holidays. Nonetheless, COVID-19 does provide an opportunity to study how people make sense of radically changing circumstances over time. In this paper we demonstrate how Twitter affords this opportunity by providing data in real time, and over time. In the present research, we collect a large pool of COVID-19 related tweets posted by New Zealanders-citizens of a country successful in containing the coronavirus-from the moment COVID-19 became evident to the world in the last days of 2019 until 19 August 2020. We undertake topic modeling on the tweets to foster understanding and sensemaking of the COVID-19 tweet landscape in New Zealand and its temporal development and evolution over time. This information can be valuable for those interested in how people react to emergent events, including researchers, governments, and policy makers.
| S-EPMC8673617 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrimary care needs to be patient-centered, integrated, and interprofessional to help patients with complex needs manage the burden of medication-related problems. Considering the growing problem of polypharmacy, increasing attention has been paid to how and when medication-related decisions should be coordinated across multidisciplinary care teams. Improved knowledge on how integrated electronic health records (EHRs) can support interprofessional shared decision-making for medication therapy management is necessary to continue improving patient care.ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to examine how physicians and pharmacists understand and communicate patient-focused medication information with each other and how this knowledge can influence the design of EHRs.MethodsThis study is part of a broader cross-Canada study between patients and health care providers around how medication-related decisions are made and communicated. We visited community pharmacies, team-based primary care clinics, and independent-practice family physician clinics throughout Ontario, Nova Scotia, Alberta, and Quebec. Research assistants conducted semistructured interviews with physicians and pharmacists. A modified version of the Multidisciplinary Framework Method was used to analyze the data.ResultsWe collected data from 19 pharmacies and 9 medical clinics and identified 6 main themes from 34 health care professionals. First, Interprofessional Shared Decision-Making was not occurring and clinicians made decisions based on their understanding of the patient. Physicians and pharmacists reported indirect Communication, incomplete Information specifically missing insight into indication and adherence, and misaligned Processes of Care that were further compounded by EHRs that are not designed to facilitate collaboration. Scope of Practice examined professional and workplace boundaries for pharmacists and physicians that were internally and externally imposed. Physicians decided on the degree of the Physician-Pharmacist Relationship, often predicated by colocation.ConclusionsWe observed limited communication and collaboration between primary care providers and pharmacists when managing medications. Pharmacists were missing key information around reason for use, and physicians required accurate information around adherence. EHRs are a potential tool to help clinicians communicate information to resolve this issue. EHRs need to be designed to facilitate interprofessional medication management so that pharmacists and physicians can move beyond task-based work toward a collaborative approach.
| S-EPMC6231837 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe overuse of antibiotics for acute otitis media (AOM) in children is a healthcare quality issue in part arising from conflicting parent and physician understanding of the risks and benefits of antibiotics for AOM. Our objective was to develop a conversation aid that supports shared decision making (SDM) with parents of children who are diagnosed with non-severe AOM in the acute care setting.Materials and methodsWe developed a web-based encounter tool following a human-centered design approach that includes active collaboration with parents, clinicians, and designers using literature review, observations of clinical encounters, parental and clinician surveys, and interviews. Insights from these processes informed the iterative creation of prototypes that were reviewed and field-tested in patient encounters.ResultsThe ear pain conversation aid includes five sections: (1) A home page that opens the discussion on the etiologies of AOM; (2) the various options available for AOM management; (3) a pictograph of the impact of antibiotic therapy on pain control; (4) a pictograph of complication rates with and without antibiotics; and (5) a summary page on management choices. This open-access, web-based tool is located at www.earpaindecisionaid.org.ConclusionsWe collaboratively developed an evidence-based conversation aid to facilitate SDM for AOM. This decision aid has the potential to improve parental medical knowledge of AOM, physician/parent communication, and possibly decrease the overuse of antibiotics for this condition.
| S-EPMC8054029 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness of the ICAN Discussion Aid in improving patients' experience of receiving care for their chronic conditions and health professionals' experience of providing their care.MethodsWe conducted a pragmatic, mixed-methods, cluster-randomized trial of the ICAN Discussion Aid at 8 clinics in 4 independent health systems in the US from January 2017 and to August 2018. Sites were randomized 1:1 in pairs. Participants were primary care health professionals and their adult patients with ≥1 chronic condition. Quantitative outcomes were health professional assessment of chronic illness care and relational coordination and patient-reported self-efficacy to manage chronic disease, self-efficacy to communicate with clinician, treatment burden, assessment of chronic illness care, general health, and disruption from illness and treatment. Uptake of ICAN was assessed with patient qualitative interviews, clinician focus groups/interviews, visit video recordings, and chart review.Results98 clinicians and 1733 patients participated. We found no significant differences between ICAN and usual care sites in mixed effect models on main outcome measures. In adjusted difference-in-differences analyses, we found patient self-efficacy to manage chronic disease (mean difference 0.61 (SE 0.27), p = 0.023), patient self-efficacy to communicate with their clinician (mean difference 0.31 (SE 0.14), p = 0.032), and health professional assessment of chronic illness care (1.42 (SE 0.52), p = 0.007) were significantly better at ICAN sites. Chart review indicated the aid was implemented in 19% of eligible encounters. Qualitative analyses highlighted limited implementation of ICAN as intended overall due to varying clinic challenges but showed that ICAN use as intended was a valued addition to the visit.ConclusionsWhen patients and clinicians use ICAN as intended, which seldom occurred, important conversations emerge. This qualitative finding did not parlay into statistically significant effects on most outcomes of interest.Trial registrationThe trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (# NCT03017196).
| S-EPMC11616879 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveImproved treatments for juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) have increased remission rates. We conducted this study to investigate how patients and caregivers make decisions about stopping medications when JIA is inactive.MethodsWe performed a mixed-methods study of caregivers and patients affected by JIA, recruited through social media and flyers, and selected by purposive sampling. Participants discussed their experiences with JIA, medications, and decision-making through recorded telephone interviews. Of 44 interviewees, 20 were patients (50% ages <18 years), and 24 were caregivers (50% caring for children ages ≤10 years). We evaluated characteristics associated with high levels of reported concerns about JIA or medicines using Fisher's exact testing.ResultsDecisions about stopping medicines were informed by competing risks between disease activity and treatment. Participants who expressed more concerns about JIA were more likely to report disease-related complications (P = 0.002) and more motivated to continue treatment. However, participants expressing more concern about medicines were more likely to report treatment-related complications (P = 0.04) and felt more compelled to stop treatment. Additionally, participants considered how JIA or treatments facilitated or interfered with their sense of normalcy and safety, expressed feelings of guilt and regret about previous or potential adverse events, and reflected on uncertainty and unpredictability of future harms. Decision-making was also informed by trust in rheumatologists and other information sources (e.g., family and online support groups).ConclusionWhen deciding whether to stop medicines whenever JIA is inactive, patients and caregivers weigh competing risks between disease activity and treatment. Based on our results, we suggest specific approaches for clinicians to perform shared decision-making regarding stopping medicines for JIA.
| S-EPMC7319899 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionShared decision making is an interpersonal process whereby healthcare providers collaborate with and support patients in decision-making. Older adults receiving home care need support with decision-making. We will explore what older adults receiving home care and their caregivers need for making better health-related decisions.Methods and analysisThis two-phase sequential exploratory mixed methods study will be conducted in a pan-Canadian healthcare organisation, SE Health. First, we will create a participant advisory group to advise us throughout the research process. In phase 1 (qualitative), we will recruit a convenience sample of 15-30 older adults and caregivers receiving home care to participate in open-ended semi-structured interviews. Phase 1 participants will be invited to share what health-related decisions they face at home and what they need for making better decisions. In phase 2 (quantitative), interdisciplinary health and social care providers will be invited to answer a web-based survey to share their views on the decisional needs of older adults and their caregivers. The survey will include questions informed by findings from qualitative interviews in phase 1, and a workbook for assessing decisional needs based on the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. Finally, qualitative and quantitative results will be triangulated (by methods, investigator, theory and source) to develop a comprehensive understanding of decision-making needs from the perspective of older adults, caregivers and health and social care providers. We will use the quality of mixed methods studies in health services research guidelines and the Checklist for Reporting the Results of Internet E-Surveys checklist.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the research ethics boards at Southlake Regional Health Centre and Université Laval. This study will inform the design of decision support interventions. Further dissemination plans include summary briefs for study participants, tailored reports for home care decision makers and policy makers, and peer-reviewed publications.Trial registration numberNCT04327830.
| S-EPMC7654109 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and hypothesisRecovering from a first psychosis is a highly individual process and requires the person to make sense of their experiences. Clinicians, in turn, need to comprehend these first-person perspectives, creating a mutual sense-making dynamic. Antipsychotic medication is a substantial part of psychosis treatment. Providing insight in the lived experience of recovery with antipsychotics could improve the mutual understanding and help bridge the gap between the perspective of the clinician and that of the person recovering from psychosis.Study design14 persons in recovery from a first psychosis with the use of antipsychotics were interviewed. Their narratives were analyzed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA).Study resultsFive overarching themes were found, representing important and meaningful experiences in recovering with antipsychotic medication. Theme 1: antipsychotics as external dampening (4 subthemes); Theme 2: shifting of realities; Theme 3: pace of recovery; Theme 4: antipsychotics' influence on identity; and Theme 5: is it truly the antipsychotics?ConclusionsOur findings show that recovery from psychosis with antipsychotics is an all-encompassing, multi-faceted, and ambivalent experience. The themes found in this research could inspire clinicians to discuss less obvious aspects of the experience of recovering with antipsychotics. Even more so, paying attention to the first-person perspective could lead to a more thorough understanding and benefit therapeutic relationships.
| S-EPMC11548922 | biostudies-literature