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.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Wyatt, K. D., Branda, M. E., Anderson, R. T., Pencille, L. J., Montori, V. M., Hess, E. P., … LeBlanc, A. (2014). Peering into the black box: A meta-analysis of how clinicians use decision aids during clinical encounters. Implementation Science, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-9-26
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.