Peering into the black box

A meta-analysis of how clinicians use decision aids during clinical encounters

Kirk D. Wyatt, Megan E. Branda, Ryan T. Anderson, Laurie J. Pencille, Victor Manuel Montori, Erik P. Hess, Henry H. Ting, Annie LeBlanc

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

47 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To quantify the extent to which clinicians use clinically-efficacious decision aids as intended during implementation in practice and how fidelity to usage instructions correlates with shared decision making (SDM) outcomes. Methods: Participant-level meta-analysis including six practice-based randomized controlled trials of SDM in various clinical settings encompassing a range of decisions.Results: Of 339 encounters in the SDM intervention arm of the trials, 229 were video recorded and available for analysis. The mean proportion of fidelity items observed in each encounter was 58.4% (SD = 23.2). The proportion of fidelity items observed was significantly associated with patient knowledge (p = 0.01) and clinician involvement of the patient in decision making (p <0.0001), while no association was found with patient decisional conflict or satisfaction with the encounter.Conclusion: Clinicians' fidelity to usage instructions of point-of-care decision aids in randomized trials was suboptimal during their initial implementation in practice, which may have underestimated the potential efficacy of decision aids when used as intended.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number26
JournalImplementation Science
Volume9
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 22 2014

Fingerprint

Decision Support Techniques
Meta-Analysis
Decision Making
Point-of-Care Systems
Randomized Controlled Trials

Keywords

  • Decision aids
  • Fidelity
  • Meta-analysis
  • Patient involvement
  • Patient-centered care
  • Shared decision making

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Medicine(all)
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health Informatics

Cite this

Peering into the black box : A meta-analysis of how clinicians use decision aids during clinical encounters. / Wyatt, Kirk D.; Branda, Megan E.; Anderson, Ryan T.; Pencille, Laurie J.; Montori, Victor Manuel; Hess, Erik P.; Ting, Henry H.; LeBlanc, Annie.

In: Implementation Science, Vol. 9, No. 1, 26, 22.02.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Wyatt, Kirk D. ; Branda, Megan E. ; Anderson, Ryan T. ; Pencille, Laurie J. ; Montori, Victor Manuel ; Hess, Erik P. ; Ting, Henry H. ; LeBlanc, Annie. / Peering into the black box : A meta-analysis of how clinicians use decision aids during clinical encounters. In: Implementation Science. 2014 ; Vol. 9, No. 1.
@article{07151d700d2c43e5b22dc1dc70f6e22b,
title = "Peering into the black box: A meta-analysis of how clinicians use decision aids during clinical encounters",
abstract = "Objective: To quantify the extent to which clinicians use clinically-efficacious decision aids as intended during implementation in practice and how fidelity to usage instructions correlates with shared decision making (SDM) outcomes. Methods: Participant-level meta-analysis including six practice-based randomized controlled trials of SDM in various clinical settings encompassing a range of decisions.Results: Of 339 encounters in the SDM intervention arm of the trials, 229 were video recorded and available for analysis. The mean proportion of fidelity items observed in each encounter was 58.4{\%} (SD = 23.2). The proportion of fidelity items observed was significantly associated with patient knowledge (p = 0.01) and clinician involvement of the patient in decision making (p <0.0001), while no association was found with patient decisional conflict or satisfaction with the encounter.Conclusion: Clinicians' fidelity to usage instructions of point-of-care decision aids in randomized trials was suboptimal during their initial implementation in practice, which may have underestimated the potential efficacy of decision aids when used as intended.",
keywords = "Decision aids, Fidelity, Meta-analysis, Patient involvement, Patient-centered care, Shared decision making",
author = "Wyatt, {Kirk D.} and Branda, {Megan E.} and Anderson, {Ryan T.} and Pencille, {Laurie J.} and Montori, {Victor Manuel} and Hess, {Erik P.} and Ting, {Henry H.} and Annie LeBlanc",
year = "2014",
month = "2",
day = "22",
doi = "10.1186/1748-5908-9-26",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
journal = "Implementation Science",
issn = "1748-5908",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Peering into the black box

T2 - A meta-analysis of how clinicians use decision aids during clinical encounters

AU - Wyatt, Kirk D.

AU - Branda, Megan E.

AU - Anderson, Ryan T.

AU - Pencille, Laurie J.

AU - Montori, Victor Manuel

AU - Hess, Erik P.

AU - Ting, Henry H.

AU - LeBlanc, Annie

PY - 2014/2/22

Y1 - 2014/2/22

N2 - Objective: To quantify the extent to which clinicians use clinically-efficacious decision aids as intended during implementation in practice and how fidelity to usage instructions correlates with shared decision making (SDM) outcomes. Methods: Participant-level meta-analysis including six practice-based randomized controlled trials of SDM in various clinical settings encompassing a range of decisions.Results: Of 339 encounters in the SDM intervention arm of the trials, 229 were video recorded and available for analysis. The mean proportion of fidelity items observed in each encounter was 58.4% (SD = 23.2). The proportion of fidelity items observed was significantly associated with patient knowledge (p = 0.01) and clinician involvement of the patient in decision making (p <0.0001), while no association was found with patient decisional conflict or satisfaction with the encounter.Conclusion: Clinicians' fidelity to usage instructions of point-of-care decision aids in randomized trials was suboptimal during their initial implementation in practice, which may have underestimated the potential efficacy of decision aids when used as intended.

AB - Objective: To quantify the extent to which clinicians use clinically-efficacious decision aids as intended during implementation in practice and how fidelity to usage instructions correlates with shared decision making (SDM) outcomes. Methods: Participant-level meta-analysis including six practice-based randomized controlled trials of SDM in various clinical settings encompassing a range of decisions.Results: Of 339 encounters in the SDM intervention arm of the trials, 229 were video recorded and available for analysis. The mean proportion of fidelity items observed in each encounter was 58.4% (SD = 23.2). The proportion of fidelity items observed was significantly associated with patient knowledge (p = 0.01) and clinician involvement of the patient in decision making (p <0.0001), while no association was found with patient decisional conflict or satisfaction with the encounter.Conclusion: Clinicians' fidelity to usage instructions of point-of-care decision aids in randomized trials was suboptimal during their initial implementation in practice, which may have underestimated the potential efficacy of decision aids when used as intended.

KW - Decision aids

KW - Fidelity

KW - Meta-analysis

KW - Patient involvement

KW - Patient-centered care

KW - Shared decision making

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84897725456&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84897725456&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/1748-5908-9-26

DO - 10.1186/1748-5908-9-26

M3 - Article

VL - 9

JO - Implementation Science

JF - Implementation Science

SN - 1748-5908

IS - 1

M1 - 26

ER -