Effects of a patient oriented decision aid for prioritising treatment goals in diabetes: pragmatic randomised controlled trial

Petra Denig*, Jan Schuling, Flora Haaijer-Ruskamp, Jaco Voorham

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    45 Citations (Scopus)
    291 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of a patient oriented decision aid for prioritising treatment goals in diabetes compared with usual care on patient empowerment and treatment decisions.

    DESIGN: Pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

    SETTING: 18 general practices in the north of the Netherlands.

    PARTICIPANTS: 344 patients with type 2 diabetes aged ≤65 years at the time of diagnosis and managed in primary care between April 2011 and August 2012: 225 were allocated to the intervention group and 119 to the usual care group.

    INTERVENTION: The intervention comprised a decision aid for people with diabetes, with individually tailored risk information and treatment options for multiple risk factors. The aid was intended to empower patients to prioritise between clinical domains and to support treatment decisions. It was offered to participants before a regular diabetes check-up and to their healthcare provider during the consultation. Four different formats of the decision aid were included for additional explorative analyses.

    MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the effects on patient empowerment for setting and achieving goals. The secondary outcomes were changes in the prescribing of drugs to regulate glucose, blood pressure, lipids, and albuminuria. Data were collected through structured questionnaires and automated data extraction from electronic health records during six months before and after the intervention.

    RESULTS: Of all intervention participants, 103 (46%) reported to have received the basic elements of the intervention. For the primary outcome analysis, 199 intervention and 107 control patients with sufficient baseline and follow-up data could be included. The mean empowerment score increased 0.1 on a 5 point scale in the overall intervention group, which was not significantly different from that of the control group (mean difference after adjusting for baseline 0.039, 95% confidence interval -0.056 to 0.134). Lipid regulating drug treatment was intensified in 25% of intervention and 12% of control participants with increased cholesterol levels, which did not reach significance when the intervention was compared with the usual care group (odds ratio 2.54, 95% confidence interval 0.89 to 7.23). Prespecified explorative analyses showed that this effect was significant for the printed version of the decision aid in comparison to usual care (3.90, 1.29 to 11.80). No relevant or significant changes were seen for other treatments.

    CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that the patient oriented treatment decision aid improves patient empowerment by an important amount. The aid was not used to its full extent in a substantial number of participants.

    TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch trial register NTR1942.

    Original languageEnglish
    Article number5651
    Number of pages14
    JournalBMJ (Clinical research ed.)
    Volume349
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 25-Sep-2014

    Keywords

    • RISK-FACTOR MANAGEMENT
    • MEDICATION ADHERENCE
    • CHRONIC ILLNESS
    • PRIMARY-CARE
    • TYPE-2
    • MELLITUS
    • QUALITY
    • DISEASE
    • INTERVENTIONS
    • COMMUNICATION

    Cite this