Developing an Individualized Patient Decision Aid for Chronic Coronary Disease Based on the ISCHEMIA Trial: A Mixed-Methods Study.

IF 6.2 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Dan D Nguyen, Carole Decker, Christina M Pacheco, Stacy L Farr, Christine Fuss, Ruth M Masterson Creber, Stephanie Pena, Nobuhiro Ikemura, Anezi I Uzendu, David J Maron, Judith S Hochman, John A Dodson, John A Spertus
{"title":"Developing an Individualized Patient Decision Aid for Chronic Coronary Disease Based on the ISCHEMIA Trial: A Mixed-Methods Study.","authors":"Dan D Nguyen, Carole Decker, Christina M Pacheco, Stacy L Farr, Christine Fuss, Ruth M Masterson Creber, Stephanie Pena, Nobuhiro Ikemura, Anezi I Uzendu, David J Maron, Judith S Hochman, John A Dodson, John A Spertus","doi":"10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.124.010923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pursuing initial invasive or conservative management of chronic coronary disease (CCD) is a preference-sensitive decision that should include shared decision-making. Communicating the benefits of either approach is challenging, as individual patients rarely achieve the population-averaged outcomes reported in clinical trials. Our objective was to develop a patient decision aid (PDA) with patient-specific estimates of outcomes for initial invasive versus conservative management of CCD, based on the ISCHEMIA trial (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a multiphase mixed-methods study using focus groups of outpatients with CCD, caregivers, clinicians, and researchers. Focus groups were held in Kansas City, MO and New York City, NY between September 2021 and June 2022. Patients with CCD were included if they had a positive stress test within 1 year. Phase 1 focused on patient priorities for outcomes to guide treatment decisions. Phase 2 involved PDA development and refinement. Phase 3 involved further refinement and member checking. Key themes involving shared decision-making and treatment preferences were elicited from focus groups using a deductive approach to develop a PDA representing the outcomes most important to patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 46 patient and caregiver participants, the mean age was 63.5 years, 53% were female, 61% were White, 24% were Black, and 9% were Hispanic. When deciding between treatments, participants valued shared decision-making but generally deferred decisions to clinicians. The outcomes most important to participants were survival and quality of life, followed by physical functioning and symptoms. To represent these outcomes, participants favored simple visualizations, such as a speedometer or health meter. When deciding between treatment options, participants preferred to use the PDA collaboratively with a clinician instead of as a stand-alone tool.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our novel, patient-centered approach to developing a PDA for CCD with patient-specific outcomes has the potential to rapidly translate clinical trial results to individual patients and support shared decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":49221,"journal":{"name":"Circulation-Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes","volume":" ","pages":"e010923"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation-Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.124.010923","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Pursuing initial invasive or conservative management of chronic coronary disease (CCD) is a preference-sensitive decision that should include shared decision-making. Communicating the benefits of either approach is challenging, as individual patients rarely achieve the population-averaged outcomes reported in clinical trials. Our objective was to develop a patient decision aid (PDA) with patient-specific estimates of outcomes for initial invasive versus conservative management of CCD, based on the ISCHEMIA trial (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches).

Methods: This was a multiphase mixed-methods study using focus groups of outpatients with CCD, caregivers, clinicians, and researchers. Focus groups were held in Kansas City, MO and New York City, NY between September 2021 and June 2022. Patients with CCD were included if they had a positive stress test within 1 year. Phase 1 focused on patient priorities for outcomes to guide treatment decisions. Phase 2 involved PDA development and refinement. Phase 3 involved further refinement and member checking. Key themes involving shared decision-making and treatment preferences were elicited from focus groups using a deductive approach to develop a PDA representing the outcomes most important to patients.

Results: Of 46 patient and caregiver participants, the mean age was 63.5 years, 53% were female, 61% were White, 24% were Black, and 9% were Hispanic. When deciding between treatments, participants valued shared decision-making but generally deferred decisions to clinicians. The outcomes most important to participants were survival and quality of life, followed by physical functioning and symptoms. To represent these outcomes, participants favored simple visualizations, such as a speedometer or health meter. When deciding between treatment options, participants preferred to use the PDA collaboratively with a clinician instead of as a stand-alone tool.

Conclusions: Our novel, patient-centered approach to developing a PDA for CCD with patient-specific outcomes has the potential to rapidly translate clinical trial results to individual patients and support shared decision-making.

基于 ISCHEMIA 试验开发个性化的慢性冠心病患者决策辅助工具:混合方法研究。
背景:对慢性冠状动脉疾病(CCD)进行初始有创治疗还是保守治疗是一个对偏好敏感的决定,其中应包括共同决策。宣传这两种方法的益处具有挑战性,因为个体患者很少能达到临床试验中报告的人群平均疗效。我们的目标是在 ISCHEMIA 试验(医疗和侵入性方法的健康效果比较国际研究)的基础上,开发一种患者决策辅助工具(PDA),其中包含针对患者的 CCD 初始侵入性治疗与保守治疗效果的估计值:这是一项多阶段混合方法研究,采用焦点小组的形式,研究对象包括门诊 CCD 患者、护理人员、临床医生和研究人员。焦点小组于 2021 年 9 月至 2022 年 6 月期间在密苏里州堪萨斯城和纽约州纽约市举行。一年内压力测试呈阳性的 CCD 患者均被纳入其中。第一阶段的重点是患者对结果的优先考虑,以指导治疗决策。第 2 阶段涉及 PDA 的开发和完善。第 3 阶段包括进一步完善和成员检查。采用演绎法从焦点小组中引出涉及共同决策和治疗偏好的关键主题,以开发出代表对患者最重要的治疗结果的 PDA:在 46 名患者和护理人员参与者中,平均年龄为 63.5 岁,53% 为女性,61% 为白人,24% 为黑人,9% 为西班牙裔。在决定治疗方案时,参与者重视共同决策,但通常将决定权交给临床医生。对参与者来说,最重要的结果是生存期和生活质量,其次是身体功能和症状。为了表示这些结果,参与者倾向于简单的可视化方式,如速度计或健康表。在决定治疗方案时,参与者更愿意与临床医生合作使用掌上电脑,而不是将其作为一个独立的工具:我们采用以患者为中心的新方法为 CCD 开发具有患者特异性结果的 PDA,这种方法有可能将临床试验结果迅速转化为个体患者的结果,并支持共同决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Circulation-Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
Circulation-Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
357
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, an American Heart Association journal, publishes articles related to improving cardiovascular health and health care. Content includes original research, reviews, and case studies relevant to clinical decision-making and healthcare policy. The online-only journal is dedicated to furthering the mission of promoting safe, effective, efficient, equitable, timely, and patient-centered care. Through its articles and contributions, the journal equips you with the knowledge you need to improve clinical care and population health, and allows you to engage in scholarly activities of consequence to the health of the public. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes considers the following types of articles: Original Research Articles, Data Reports, Methods Papers, Cardiovascular Perspectives, Care Innovations, Novel Statistical Methods, Policy Briefs, Data Visualizations, and Caregiver or Patient Viewpoints.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信