Use of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid in patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece

A cluster randomised trial

Thomas Karagiannis, Aris Liakos, Megan E. Branda, Eleni Athanasiadou, Maria Mainou, Panagiota Boura, Dimitrios G. Goulis, Annie LeBlanc, Victor Manuel Montori, Apostolos Tsapas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To assess the efficacy of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid among patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece. Design: Open-label cluster randomised controlled trial. Setting: Primary and secondary care practices across Greece. Participants: 5 sites allocated to the decision aid (n=101 patients) and 4 sites to control (n=103 patients). Intervention: Clinicians and patients in the intervention arm used a decision aid, based on outcomes that both consider important when choosing among antihyperglycaemic medications. Patients in the control arm received usual care. Outcome measures: The primary outcome was patient's level of decisional comfort after the initial clinical encounter. Secondary outcomes included patient's knowledge about type 2 diabetes and medications, and patient's and clinician's satisfaction. Adherence to prescribed antihyperglycaemic medication and change in glycated haemoglobin were assessed at 24 weeks. Results: Patients in both arms had similar scores in overall decisional comfort (mean difference between the usual care and decision aid arms -6.9, 95% CI -21.5 to 7.7) and its subscales. Patients' knowledge was high in both arms (mean difference 2.3%, 95% CI -15.7% to 20.4%). Patients and clinicians in both groups were equally satisfied with the decision-making. No significant difference in medication adherence and glycaemic control was found across arms. Clinicians found the decision aid useful and reported that its integration in their daily routine was easy. Conclusions: The decision aid was implemented and positively received in the clinical setting in Greece, in line with the patient-centred approach endorsed by current guidelines. However, this trial yielded imprecise results in terms of patient outcomes. Further research is needed to investigate the interaction between the patient and the clinician in order to clarify the association between the use of decision aids and implementation of shared decision-making.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere012185
JournalBMJ Open
Volume6
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2016

Fingerprint

Decision Support Techniques
Greece
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Hypoglycemic Agents
Decision Making
Secondary Care
Medication Adherence
Glycosylated Hemoglobin A
Patient Satisfaction
Primary Health Care
Randomized Controlled Trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Karagiannis, T., Liakos, A., Branda, M. E., Athanasiadou, E., Mainou, M., Boura, P., ... Tsapas, A. (2016). Use of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid in patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece: A cluster randomised trial. BMJ Open, 6(11), [e012185]. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012185

Use of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid in patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece : A cluster randomised trial. / Karagiannis, Thomas; Liakos, Aris; Branda, Megan E.; Athanasiadou, Eleni; Mainou, Maria; Boura, Panagiota; Goulis, Dimitrios G.; LeBlanc, Annie; Montori, Victor Manuel; Tsapas, Apostolos.

In: BMJ Open, Vol. 6, No. 11, e012185, 01.11.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Karagiannis, T, Liakos, A, Branda, ME, Athanasiadou, E, Mainou, M, Boura, P, Goulis, DG, LeBlanc, A, Montori, VM & Tsapas, A 2016, 'Use of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid in patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece: A cluster randomised trial', BMJ Open, vol. 6, no. 11, e012185. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012185
Karagiannis, Thomas ; Liakos, Aris ; Branda, Megan E. ; Athanasiadou, Eleni ; Mainou, Maria ; Boura, Panagiota ; Goulis, Dimitrios G. ; LeBlanc, Annie ; Montori, Victor Manuel ; Tsapas, Apostolos. / Use of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid in patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece : A cluster randomised trial. In: BMJ Open. 2016 ; Vol. 6, No. 11.
@article{ee138be2181f4522aad06a27b180762a,
title = "Use of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid in patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece: A cluster randomised trial",
abstract = "Objective: To assess the efficacy of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid among patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece. Design: Open-label cluster randomised controlled trial. Setting: Primary and secondary care practices across Greece. Participants: 5 sites allocated to the decision aid (n=101 patients) and 4 sites to control (n=103 patients). Intervention: Clinicians and patients in the intervention arm used a decision aid, based on outcomes that both consider important when choosing among antihyperglycaemic medications. Patients in the control arm received usual care. Outcome measures: The primary outcome was patient's level of decisional comfort after the initial clinical encounter. Secondary outcomes included patient's knowledge about type 2 diabetes and medications, and patient's and clinician's satisfaction. Adherence to prescribed antihyperglycaemic medication and change in glycated haemoglobin were assessed at 24 weeks. Results: Patients in both arms had similar scores in overall decisional comfort (mean difference between the usual care and decision aid arms -6.9, 95{\%} CI -21.5 to 7.7) and its subscales. Patients' knowledge was high in both arms (mean difference 2.3{\%}, 95{\%} CI -15.7{\%} to 20.4{\%}). Patients and clinicians in both groups were equally satisfied with the decision-making. No significant difference in medication adherence and glycaemic control was found across arms. Clinicians found the decision aid useful and reported that its integration in their daily routine was easy. Conclusions: The decision aid was implemented and positively received in the clinical setting in Greece, in line with the patient-centred approach endorsed by current guidelines. However, this trial yielded imprecise results in terms of patient outcomes. Further research is needed to investigate the interaction between the patient and the clinician in order to clarify the association between the use of decision aids and implementation of shared decision-making.",
author = "Thomas Karagiannis and Aris Liakos and Branda, {Megan E.} and Eleni Athanasiadou and Maria Mainou and Panagiota Boura and Goulis, {Dimitrios G.} and Annie LeBlanc and Montori, {Victor Manuel} and Apostolos Tsapas",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012185",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
journal = "BMJ Open",
issn = "2044-6055",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid in patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece

T2 - A cluster randomised trial

AU - Karagiannis, Thomas

AU - Liakos, Aris

AU - Branda, Megan E.

AU - Athanasiadou, Eleni

AU - Mainou, Maria

AU - Boura, Panagiota

AU - Goulis, Dimitrios G.

AU - LeBlanc, Annie

AU - Montori, Victor Manuel

AU - Tsapas, Apostolos

PY - 2016/11/1

Y1 - 2016/11/1

N2 - Objective: To assess the efficacy of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid among patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece. Design: Open-label cluster randomised controlled trial. Setting: Primary and secondary care practices across Greece. Participants: 5 sites allocated to the decision aid (n=101 patients) and 4 sites to control (n=103 patients). Intervention: Clinicians and patients in the intervention arm used a decision aid, based on outcomes that both consider important when choosing among antihyperglycaemic medications. Patients in the control arm received usual care. Outcome measures: The primary outcome was patient's level of decisional comfort after the initial clinical encounter. Secondary outcomes included patient's knowledge about type 2 diabetes and medications, and patient's and clinician's satisfaction. Adherence to prescribed antihyperglycaemic medication and change in glycated haemoglobin were assessed at 24 weeks. Results: Patients in both arms had similar scores in overall decisional comfort (mean difference between the usual care and decision aid arms -6.9, 95% CI -21.5 to 7.7) and its subscales. Patients' knowledge was high in both arms (mean difference 2.3%, 95% CI -15.7% to 20.4%). Patients and clinicians in both groups were equally satisfied with the decision-making. No significant difference in medication adherence and glycaemic control was found across arms. Clinicians found the decision aid useful and reported that its integration in their daily routine was easy. Conclusions: The decision aid was implemented and positively received in the clinical setting in Greece, in line with the patient-centred approach endorsed by current guidelines. However, this trial yielded imprecise results in terms of patient outcomes. Further research is needed to investigate the interaction between the patient and the clinician in order to clarify the association between the use of decision aids and implementation of shared decision-making.

AB - Objective: To assess the efficacy of the Diabetes Medication Choice Decision Aid among patients with type 2 diabetes in Greece. Design: Open-label cluster randomised controlled trial. Setting: Primary and secondary care practices across Greece. Participants: 5 sites allocated to the decision aid (n=101 patients) and 4 sites to control (n=103 patients). Intervention: Clinicians and patients in the intervention arm used a decision aid, based on outcomes that both consider important when choosing among antihyperglycaemic medications. Patients in the control arm received usual care. Outcome measures: The primary outcome was patient's level of decisional comfort after the initial clinical encounter. Secondary outcomes included patient's knowledge about type 2 diabetes and medications, and patient's and clinician's satisfaction. Adherence to prescribed antihyperglycaemic medication and change in glycated haemoglobin were assessed at 24 weeks. Results: Patients in both arms had similar scores in overall decisional comfort (mean difference between the usual care and decision aid arms -6.9, 95% CI -21.5 to 7.7) and its subscales. Patients' knowledge was high in both arms (mean difference 2.3%, 95% CI -15.7% to 20.4%). Patients and clinicians in both groups were equally satisfied with the decision-making. No significant difference in medication adherence and glycaemic control was found across arms. Clinicians found the decision aid useful and reported that its integration in their daily routine was easy. Conclusions: The decision aid was implemented and positively received in the clinical setting in Greece, in line with the patient-centred approach endorsed by current guidelines. However, this trial yielded imprecise results in terms of patient outcomes. Further research is needed to investigate the interaction between the patient and the clinician in order to clarify the association between the use of decision aids and implementation of shared decision-making.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995975940&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84995975940&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012185

DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012185

M3 - Article

VL - 6

JO - BMJ Open

JF - BMJ Open

SN - 2044-6055

IS - 11

M1 - e012185

ER -