The Statin Choice decision aid in primary care: A randomized trial

Devin M. Mann, Diego Ponieman, Victor Manuel Montori, Jacqueline Arciniega, Thomas McGinn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

88 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To assess the impact of a decision aid on perceived risk of heart attacks and medication adherence among urban primary care patients with diabetes. Methods: We randomly allocated 150 patients with diabetes to participate in a usual primary care visit either with or without the Statin Choice tool. Participants completed a questionnaire at baseline and telephone follow-up at 3 and 6 months. Results: Intervention patients were more likely to accurately perceive their underlying risk for a heart attack without taking a statin (OR: 1.9, CI: 1.0-3.8) and with taking a statin (OR: 1.4, CI: 0.7-2.8); a decline in risk overestimation among patients receiving the decision aid accounts for this finding. There was no difference in statin adherence at 3 or 6 months. Conclusion: A decision aid about using statins to reduce coronary risk among patients with diabetes improved risk communication, beliefs, and decisional conflict, but did not improve adherence to statins. Practice implications: Decision aid enhanced communication about the risks and benefits of statins improved patient risk perceptions but did not alter adherence among patients with diabetes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)138-140
Number of pages3
JournalPatient Education and Counseling
Volume80
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2010

Fingerprint

Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors
Decision Support Techniques
Primary Health Care
Myocardial Infarction
Communication
Medication Adherence
Patient Compliance
Telephone

Keywords

  • Decision aid
  • Diabetes
  • Health beliefs
  • Medication adherence
  • Patient-provider communication
  • RCT
  • Risk communication
  • Statins

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

The Statin Choice decision aid in primary care : A randomized trial. / Mann, Devin M.; Ponieman, Diego; Montori, Victor Manuel; Arciniega, Jacqueline; McGinn, Thomas.

In: Patient Education and Counseling, Vol. 80, No. 1, 07.2010, p. 138-140.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mann, Devin M. ; Ponieman, Diego ; Montori, Victor Manuel ; Arciniega, Jacqueline ; McGinn, Thomas. / The Statin Choice decision aid in primary care : A randomized trial. In: Patient Education and Counseling. 2010 ; Vol. 80, No. 1. pp. 138-140.
@article{23ba904bf70c4245af145509e49f0a93,
title = "The Statin Choice decision aid in primary care: A randomized trial",
abstract = "Objective: To assess the impact of a decision aid on perceived risk of heart attacks and medication adherence among urban primary care patients with diabetes. Methods: We randomly allocated 150 patients with diabetes to participate in a usual primary care visit either with or without the Statin Choice tool. Participants completed a questionnaire at baseline and telephone follow-up at 3 and 6 months. Results: Intervention patients were more likely to accurately perceive their underlying risk for a heart attack without taking a statin (OR: 1.9, CI: 1.0-3.8) and with taking a statin (OR: 1.4, CI: 0.7-2.8); a decline in risk overestimation among patients receiving the decision aid accounts for this finding. There was no difference in statin adherence at 3 or 6 months. Conclusion: A decision aid about using statins to reduce coronary risk among patients with diabetes improved risk communication, beliefs, and decisional conflict, but did not improve adherence to statins. Practice implications: Decision aid enhanced communication about the risks and benefits of statins improved patient risk perceptions but did not alter adherence among patients with diabetes.",
keywords = "Decision aid, Diabetes, Health beliefs, Medication adherence, Patient-provider communication, RCT, Risk communication, Statins",
author = "Mann, {Devin M.} and Diego Ponieman and Montori, {Victor Manuel} and Jacqueline Arciniega and Thomas McGinn",
year = "2010",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1016/j.pec.2009.10.008",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "80",
pages = "138--140",
journal = "Patient Education and Counseling",
issn = "0738-3991",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Statin Choice decision aid in primary care

T2 - A randomized trial

AU - Mann, Devin M.

AU - Ponieman, Diego

AU - Montori, Victor Manuel

AU - Arciniega, Jacqueline

AU - McGinn, Thomas

PY - 2010/7

Y1 - 2010/7

N2 - Objective: To assess the impact of a decision aid on perceived risk of heart attacks and medication adherence among urban primary care patients with diabetes. Methods: We randomly allocated 150 patients with diabetes to participate in a usual primary care visit either with or without the Statin Choice tool. Participants completed a questionnaire at baseline and telephone follow-up at 3 and 6 months. Results: Intervention patients were more likely to accurately perceive their underlying risk for a heart attack without taking a statin (OR: 1.9, CI: 1.0-3.8) and with taking a statin (OR: 1.4, CI: 0.7-2.8); a decline in risk overestimation among patients receiving the decision aid accounts for this finding. There was no difference in statin adherence at 3 or 6 months. Conclusion: A decision aid about using statins to reduce coronary risk among patients with diabetes improved risk communication, beliefs, and decisional conflict, but did not improve adherence to statins. Practice implications: Decision aid enhanced communication about the risks and benefits of statins improved patient risk perceptions but did not alter adherence among patients with diabetes.

AB - Objective: To assess the impact of a decision aid on perceived risk of heart attacks and medication adherence among urban primary care patients with diabetes. Methods: We randomly allocated 150 patients with diabetes to participate in a usual primary care visit either with or without the Statin Choice tool. Participants completed a questionnaire at baseline and telephone follow-up at 3 and 6 months. Results: Intervention patients were more likely to accurately perceive their underlying risk for a heart attack without taking a statin (OR: 1.9, CI: 1.0-3.8) and with taking a statin (OR: 1.4, CI: 0.7-2.8); a decline in risk overestimation among patients receiving the decision aid accounts for this finding. There was no difference in statin adherence at 3 or 6 months. Conclusion: A decision aid about using statins to reduce coronary risk among patients with diabetes improved risk communication, beliefs, and decisional conflict, but did not improve adherence to statins. Practice implications: Decision aid enhanced communication about the risks and benefits of statins improved patient risk perceptions but did not alter adherence among patients with diabetes.

KW - Decision aid

KW - Diabetes

KW - Health beliefs

KW - Medication adherence

KW - Patient-provider communication

KW - RCT

KW - Risk communication

KW - Statins

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77953537751&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77953537751&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.pec.2009.10.008

DO - 10.1016/j.pec.2009.10.008

M3 - Article

C2 - 19959322

AN - SCOPUS:77953537751

VL - 80

SP - 138

EP - 140

JO - Patient Education and Counseling

JF - Patient Education and Counseling

SN - 0738-3991

IS - 1

ER -