Development of a patient decision aid for prevention of myocardial infarction in type 2 diabetes - rationale, design and pilot testing.

Matthias Lenz, Jürgen Kasper, Ingrid Mühlhauser
{"title":"Development of a patient decision aid for prevention of myocardial infarction in type 2 diabetes - rationale, design and pilot testing.","authors":"Matthias Lenz, Jürgen Kasper, Ingrid Mühlhauser","doi":"10.3205/psm000061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Development and testing of a decision aid about prevention of myocardial infarction for persons with type 2 diabetes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Development and testing were guided by the UK Medical Research Council's guidance for the development and evaluation of complex interventions. This comprised a systematic literature review, a focus group of 9 potential providers, modelling a prototype, interviews to qualitatively explore understanding and additional information needs, and revision of the decision aid.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The decision aid includes evidence-based information, a tool for individual risk-assessment, worksheets, and an action plan. Five diabetes educators and 15 patients underwent two 60-minutes face-to-face interviews, firstly browsing the decision aid for the first time and then after using it. Both groups differed in their ratings. Overall, the decision aid was rated to present essential information in a complex but understandable and unbiased manner. Difficulties involved understanding of terminology and risk interpretation. \"Social status as a risk factor\" was the most challenged content by educators but considered as highly important by patients. The risk assessment tool was used inadequately. 5 patients allocated themselves into false risk categories. After revision of the tool, all 12 patients who were recruited for reassessment used the tool correctly.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The decision aid was evaluated with diabetes educators and patients. Qualitative data analysis revealed aspects for revision. The decision aid is planned to be part of a shared decision making programme, comprising a strategy for patient counselling and educational modules addressed to providers. Quantitative evaluation is required to assess its effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":88305,"journal":{"name":"Psycho-social medicine","volume":"6 ","pages":"Doc05"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0b/e4/PSM-06-05.PMC2775196.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psycho-social medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/psm000061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: Development and testing of a decision aid about prevention of myocardial infarction for persons with type 2 diabetes.

Methods: Development and testing were guided by the UK Medical Research Council's guidance for the development and evaluation of complex interventions. This comprised a systematic literature review, a focus group of 9 potential providers, modelling a prototype, interviews to qualitatively explore understanding and additional information needs, and revision of the decision aid.

Results: The decision aid includes evidence-based information, a tool for individual risk-assessment, worksheets, and an action plan. Five diabetes educators and 15 patients underwent two 60-minutes face-to-face interviews, firstly browsing the decision aid for the first time and then after using it. Both groups differed in their ratings. Overall, the decision aid was rated to present essential information in a complex but understandable and unbiased manner. Difficulties involved understanding of terminology and risk interpretation. "Social status as a risk factor" was the most challenged content by educators but considered as highly important by patients. The risk assessment tool was used inadequately. 5 patients allocated themselves into false risk categories. After revision of the tool, all 12 patients who were recruited for reassessment used the tool correctly.

Conclusion: The decision aid was evaluated with diabetes educators and patients. Qualitative data analysis revealed aspects for revision. The decision aid is planned to be part of a shared decision making programme, comprising a strategy for patient counselling and educational modules addressed to providers. Quantitative evaluation is required to assess its effectiveness.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

开发用于预防 2 型糖尿病心肌梗死的患者决策辅助工具--原理、设计和试点测试。
目的:为 2 型糖尿病患者开发和测试预防心肌梗死的决策辅助工具:开发和测试以英国医学研究委员会的复杂干预措施开发和评估指南为指导。其中包括系统的文献综述、由 9 名潜在提供者组成的焦点小组、原型建模、定性探索理解和额外信息需求的访谈,以及对决策辅助工具的修订:决策辅助工具包括循证信息、个人风险评估工具、工作表和行动计划。5 名糖尿病教育工作者和 15 名患者接受了两次 60 分钟的面对面访谈,首先是首次浏览决策辅助工具,然后是在使用之后。两组人的评价各不相同。总体而言,患者认为决策辅助工具以复杂但易于理解和公正的方式介绍了基本信息。困难在于对术语的理解和风险的解释。"社会地位作为风险因素 "是最受教育者质疑的内容,但患者认为非常重要。风险评估工具使用不当。5 名患者将自己归入了错误的风险类别。在对工具进行修订后,所有 12 名接受重新评估的患者都正确使用了该工具:结论:糖尿病教育者和患者对决策辅助工具进行了评估。定性数据分析揭示了需要修改的方面。计划将该决策辅助工具作为共同决策计划的一部分,其中包括患者咨询策略和针对医疗服务提供者的教育模块。为评估其有效性,需要进行定量评估。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书