Back to Search Results

Effects of Shared Decision Making with Patient Decision Aid for Post-Angiography Hemostasis Method Selection: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Department of Medical Imaging, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan. School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan. Department of Radiology, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan; Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan. Shared Decision Making Resource Center, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan. Graduate Institute of Athletics and Coaching Science, National Taiwan Sport University, Taoyuan, Taiwan. Shared Decision Making Resource Center, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan; Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan; Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan; Cochrane Taiwan, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan. Electronic address: kelvintam@h.tmu.edu.tw.

Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR. 2023
Full text from:

Other resources

Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the effects of shared decision-making (SDM) with patient decision aid (PtDA) on hemostasis device selection and reduction of decisional conflicts in patients undergoing transfemoral angiography. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients undergoing angiography were randomized to receive either a standard explanation or the process aid of PtDA for choosing hemostasis devices. The decisional conflict was assessed using the 4-item SURE (Sure of myself; Understand information; Risk-benefit ratio; Encouragement) scale. Differences in demographic variables, clinical variables, and final choice of hemostasis devices were compared through univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS In total, 158 patients were included-80 in the PtDA group and 78 in the standard group. No difference was found between the two groups in terms of patient demographic and clinical variables. The PtDA group scored better on all questions of the SURE scale both individually and collaboratively (P < .001). PtDA intervention (P = .031) and the reason for angiography (P = .0006) were the main variables that influenced patient hemostasis device choice in the univariable logistic regression analysis. Reason for angiography remained the only deciding factor that affected patient choice in multivariable logistic regression analysis (P = .015). CONCLUSIONS Step-by-step guidance and pictorial explanation with the assistance of PtDA led to improvements in patient knowledge but show no significant impact in multivariate analysis for the influence on the choice of hemostasis device. Implementation of PtDA-aided SDM is recommended for improving patient-centered care.
Study details
Language : eng
Credits : Bibliographic data from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine