Premium
Use of Decision Support for Improved Knowledge, Values Clarification, and Informed Choice in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis
Author(s) -
Fraenkel Liana,
Matzko Cynthia K.,
Webb Debra E.,
Oppermann Brian,
Charpentier Peter,
Peters Ellen,
Reyna Valerie,
Newman Eric D.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
arthritis care and research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.032
H-Index - 163
eISSN - 2151-4658
pISSN - 2151-464X
DOI - 10.1002/acr.22659
Subject(s) - rheumatoid arthritis , randomized controlled trial , medicine , clarity , physical therapy , decision aids , intervention (counseling) , psychology , clinical psychology , alternative medicine , nursing , biochemistry , chemistry , pathology
Objective To examine the potential value of a theory‐based, interactive decision support tool in clinical practice for patients with rheumatoid arthritis who are candidates for biologic agents. Methods We conducted an 8‐week, 2‐arm, parallel, single‐blind pilot trial in which candidates for treatment escalation with a biologic agent were randomized to receive either a link to a web‐based tool or usual care. Outcomes included changes in objective knowledge, subjective knowledge, values clarification, and satisfaction with risk communication as well as the proportion of subjects defined as making an informed choice to escalate care at 2 weeks. Results A total of 125 subjects were randomized. Significant between‐group differences at 2 weeks favoring the intervention group were seen for changes in objective knowledge, subjective knowledge, and values clarification. No significant between‐group differences were found in subjects’ satisfaction with risk communication. Among those deciding to escalate care, a greater percentage met the criteria for an informed choice at 2 weeks in the intervention group compared to the control group (32% versus 13%; P = 0.02). Improvements in subjective knowledge and values clarification persisted at 8 weeks. There were no between‐group differences in objective knowledge at 8 weeks. Conclusion In this study, use of a decision support tool at the time of decision‐making resulted in improved objective and subjective knowledge, as well as values clarity, compared to usual care. Not all improvements were sustained, emphasizing the need to offer educational support should additional escalation of care be required over the course of the illness.