Dataset Information

Patient-Clinician Decision Making for Stable Angina: The Role of Health Literacy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Stable angina patients have difficulty understanding the tradeoffs between treatment alternatives. In this analysis, we assessed treatment planning conversations for stable angina to determine whether inadequate health literacy acts as a barrier to communication that may partially explain this difficulty.

Methods

We conducted a descriptive analysis of patient questionnaire data from the PCI Choice Trial. The main outcomes were the responses to the Decisional Conflict Scale and the proportion of correct responses to knowledge questions about stable angina. We also conducted a qualitative analysis on recordings of patient-clinician discussions about treatment planning. The recordings were coded with the OPTION12 instrument for shared decision-making. Two analysts independently assessed the number and types of patient questions and expressions of preferences.

Results

Patient engagement did not differ by health literacy level and was generally low for all patients with respect to OPTION12 scores and the number of questions related to clinical aspects of treatment. Patients with inadequate health literacy had significantly higher decisional conflict. However, the proportion of knowledge questions answered correctly did not differ significantly by health literacy level.

Conclusions

Patients with inadequate health literacy had greater decisional conflict but no difference in knowledge compared to patients with adequate health literacy. Inadequate health literacy may act as a barrier to communication, but gaps were found in patient engagement and knowledge for patients of all health literacy levels. The recorded patient-clinician encounters and the health literacy measure were valuable resources for conducting research on care delivery.

SUBMITTER: Savitz ST

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6688543 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient-Clinician Decision Making for Stable Angina: The Role of Health Literacy.

Savitz Samuel T ST Dobler Claudia C CC Shah Nilay D ND Bennett Antonia V AV Bailey Stacy Cooper SC Dusetzina Stacie B SB Jones W Schuyler WS Stearns Sally C SC Montori Victor M VM

EGEMS (Washington, DC) 20190809 1

<h4>Background</h4>Stable angina patients have difficulty understanding the tradeoffs between treatment alternatives. In this analysis, we assessed treatment planning conversations for stable angina to determine whether inadequate health literacy acts as a barrier to communication that may partially explain this difficulty.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a descriptive analysis of patient questionnaire data from the PCI Choice Trial. The main outcomes were the responses to the Decisional Conflict Sc ...[more]

PMID: 31406699

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundResearch shows that people with stable angina need decision support when considering elective treatments. Initial treatment is with medicines but patients may gain further benefit with invasive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Choosing between these treatments can be challenging for patients because both confer similar benefits but have different risks. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) are evidence-based interventions that support shared decision-making (SDM) when making healthcare decisions. This study aimed to develop and user-test a digital patient decision aid (CONNECT) to facilitate SDM for people with stable angina considering invasive treatment with elective PCI.MethodsA multi-phase study was conducted to develop and test CONNECT (COroNary aNgioplasty dECision Tool) using approaches recommended by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration: (i) Steering Group assembled, (ii) review of clinical guidance, (iii) co-design workshops with patients and cardiology health professionals, (iv) first prototype developed and 'alpha' tested (semi-structured cognitive interviews and 12-item acceptability questionnaire) with patients, cardiologists and cardiac nurses, recruited from two hospitals in Northern England, and (v) final PtDA refined following iterative user-feedback. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively and qualitative data from the interviews analysed using deductive content analysis.ResultsCONNECT was developed and user-tested with 34 patients and 29 cardiology health professionals. Findings showed that CONNECT was generally acceptable, usable, comprehensible, and desirable. Participants suggested that CONNECT had the potential to improve care quality by personalising consultations and facilitating SDM and informed consent. Patient safety may be improved as CONNECT includes questions about symptom burden which can identify asymptomatic patients unlikely to benefit from PCI, as well as those who may need to be fast tracked because of worsening symptoms.ConclusionsCONNECT is the first digital PtDA for people with stable angina considering elective PCI, developed in the UK using recommended processes and fulfilling international quality criteria. CONNECT shows promise as an approach to facilitate SDM and should be evaluated in a clinical trial. Further work is required to standardise the provision of probabilistic risk information for people considering elective PCI and to understand how CONNECT can be accessible to underserved communities.

Project description:Rationale, aims, and objectivesClinical studies show equivalent health outcomes from interventional procedures and treatment with medication only for stable angina patients. However, patients may be subject to overuse or access barriers for interventional procedures and may exhibit suboptimal adherence to medications. Our objective is to evaluate whether community-level health literacy is associated with treatment selection and medication adherence patterns.MethodThe sample included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries (20% random sample) with stable angina in 2007-2013. We used an area-level health literacy variable because of the lack of an individual measure in claims. We measured the association between (a) area-based health literacy with treatment selection (medication only, percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery) and (b) area-based health literacy with medication adherence. We controlled for other factors including demographics, co-morbidity burden, dual eligibility, and area deprivation index.ResultsWe identified 8300 patients of whom 8.7% lived in a low health literacy area. Overall, 56% of patients received medication only, 28% received PCI, and 15% received CABG. Patients in low health literacy areas were less likely to receive CABG (-3.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -6.8 to -0.3) than were patients in high health literacy areas, but the significance was sensitive to specification. Overall, 81.5% and 71.5% of patients were adherent to antianginals and statins, respectively. Living in low health literacy areas was associated with lower adherence to antianginals (-3.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -6.1 to -0.6) but not statins.ConclusionsLow area-based health literacy was associated with being less likely to receive CABG and lower adherence, but the differences between low and high health literacy areas were small and sensitive to model specification. Individual factors such as dual eligibility status and race/ethnicity had stronger associations with outcomes than had area-based health literacy, suggesting that this area-based measure was inadequate to account for social determinants in this study.

Project description:BackgroundEffective use of a patient decision aid (PtDA) can be affected by the user's health literacy and the PtDA's characteristics. Systematic reviews of the relevant literature can guide PtDA developers to attend to the health literacy needs of patients. The reviews reported here aimed to assess:MethodsWe reviewed literature for evidence relevant to these two aims. When high-quality systematic reviews existed, we summarized their evidence. When reviews were unavailable, we conducted our own systematic reviews.ResultsAim 1: In an existing systematic review of PtDA trials, lower health literacy was associated with lower patient health knowledge (14 of 16 eligible studies). Fourteen studies reported practical design strategies to improve knowledge for lower health literacy patients. In our own systematic review, no studies reported on values clarity per se, but in 2 lower health literacy was related to higher decisional uncertainty and regret. Lower health literacy was associated with less desire for involvement in 3 studies, less question-asking in 2, and less patient-centered communication in 4 studies; its effects on other measures of patient involvement were mixed. Only one study assessed the effects of a health literacy intervention on outcomes; it showed that using video to improve the salience of health states reduced decisional uncertainty. Aim 2: In our review of 97 trials, only 3 PtDAs overtly addressed the needs of lower health literacy users. In 90% of trials, user health literacy and readability of the PtDA were not reported. However, increases in knowledge and informed choice were reported in those studies in which health literacy needs were addressed.ConclusionLower health literacy affects key decision-making outcomes, but few existing PtDAs have addressed the needs of lower health literacy users. The specific effects of PtDAs designed to mitigate the influence of low health literacy are unknown. More attention to the needs of patients with lower health literacy is indicated, to ensure that PtDAs are appropriate for lower as well as higher health literacy patients.

Project description:BackgroundHealth literacy among Japanese is often low, making it difficult for them to evaluate health information and make informed decisions. However, the health literacy scales applied measure the perceived difficulty of health-related tasks; they do not directly assess the specific skills needed to perform the tasks: the skills to judge the reliability of diverse information using evaluation criteria and implement rational decision-making. Therefore, the study objectives were to investigate the following issues using a nationwide survey in Japan. (1) When obtaining information, to what extent do people apply criteria for evaluating information to confirm its reliability; when making decisions, to what extent do they seek out available options and compare pros and cons based on their own values? (2) How strongly are such skills associated with health literacy and demographic characteristics? (3) What opportunities are available to learn these skills?MethodsWe conducted an online questionnaire survey using a Japanese Internet research company; 3,914 valid responses were received. The measures comprised health literacy (European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire), five items on information evaluation, four items on decision-making, and items on the availability and location of learning opportunities. We calculated Pearson correlations to explore the association of health literacy with information-evaluation and decision-making skills. Multivariate analyses were also conducted using these factors as dependent variables.ResultsFewer than half (30%-50%) of respondents reported always or often evaluating information and engaging in decision-making. Health literacy was significantly and positively correlated with the specific skills of information evaluation and decision-making (r = .26 and .30, respectively) as were multivariate analyses (beta = .15 and .22, respectively). Over 40% of respondents had never learned those skills. The most common resources for learning the skills were the Internet and television; less-used resources were schools and workplaces.ConclusionsBoth information-evaluation and decision-making skills were associated with health literacy. However, these skills are not sufficiently widespread in Japan because there are few opportunities to acquire them. More research is needed to raise awareness of the importance of such skills for improving health literacy and providing learning opportunities.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Guidelines recommend, and Medicare requires, shared decision-making between patients and clinicians before referring individuals at high risk of lung cancer for chest CT screening. However, little is known about the extent to which shared decision-making about lung cancer screening is achieved in real-world settings. OBJECTIVE:To characterize patient and clinician impressions of early experiences with communication and decision-making about lung cancer screening and perceived barriers to achieving shared decision-making. DESIGN:Qualitative study entailing semi-structured interviews and focus groups. PARTICIPANTS:We enrolled 36 clinicians who refer patients for lung cancer screening and 49 patients who had undergone lung cancer screening in the prior year. Participants were recruited from lung cancer screening programs at four hospitals (three Veterans Health Administration, one urban safety net). APPROACH:Using content analysis, we analyzed transcripts to characterize communication and decision-making about lung cancer screening. Our analysis focused on the recommended components of shared decision-making (information sharing, deliberation, and decision aid use) and barriers to achieving shared decision-making. KEY RESULTS:Clinicians varied in the information shared with patients, and did not consistently incorporate decision aids. Clinicians believed they explained the rationale and gave some (often purposely limited) information about the trade-offs of lung cancer screening. By contrast, some patients reported receiving little information about screening or its trade-offs and did not realize the CT was intended as a screening test for lung cancer. Clinicians and patients alike did not perceive that significant deliberation typically occurred. Clinicians perceived insufficient time, competing priorities, difficulty accessing decision aids, limited patient comprehension, and anticipated patient emotions as barriers to realizing shared decision-making. CONCLUSIONS:Due to multiple perceived barriers, patient-clinician conversations about lung cancer screening may fall short of guideline-recommended shared decision-making supported by a decision aid. Consequently, patients may be left uncertain about lung cancer screening's rationale, trade-offs, and process.

Dataset Information

Patient-Clinician Decision Making for Stable Angina: The Role of Health Literacy.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Patient-Clinician Decision Making for Stable Angina: The Role of Health Literacy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets