Title
Peering into the black box: A meta-analysis of how clinicians use decision aids during clinical encounters
Date Issued
22 February 2014
Access level
open access
Resource Type
journal article
Author(s)
Mayo Clinic
Publisher(s)
Springer Nature
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. © 2014 Wyatt et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
Volume
9
Issue
1
Language
English
OCDE Knowledge area
Ciencias médicas, Ciencias de la salud
Subjects
Scopus EID
2-s2.0-84897725456
PubMed ID
Source
Implementation Science
ISSN of the container
1748-5908
Sponsor(s)
Funding for the included trials was provided by the National Institutes of Health – National Institute for Diabetes, Digestive, and Kidney Diseases; the American Diabetes Association; the Informed Medical Decision Making Foundation; and the Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research.
Sources of information:
Directorio de Producción Científica
Scopus