Dataset Information

Decision-analytic modeling to assist decision making in organizational innovation: the case of shared care in hearing aid provision.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To illustrate the use of decision-analytic modeling to assist decision making in organizational innovations. STUDY SETTING/DATA SOURCES: Regarding an organizational innovation (shared care in hearing aid provision) available evidence from different sources was synthesized. STUDY DESIGN: A probabilistic Markov model was constructed. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION: We modeled the long-term cost-effectiveness of different organizational formats of shared care as opposed to the current organization. We assessed the expected value of perfect information (EVPI) for several groups of parameters in the model. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The current organization had the highest probability of being cost-effective. Additional research is worthwhile, especially on access to care and safety (sensitivity to detect pathology). CONCLUSIONS: Decision-analytic modeling in an early stage of organizational innovation is a valuable tool to facilitate evidence-based decision making.

SUBMITTER: Grutters JP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2653881 | biostudies-other | 2008 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Decision-analytic modeling to assist decision making in organizational innovation: the case of shared care in hearing aid provision.

Grutters Janneke P C JP Joore Manuela A MA Van Der Horst Frans F Stokroos Robert J RJ Anteunis Lucien J C LJ

Health services research 20080603 5 Pt 1

<h4>Objective</h4>To illustrate the use of decision-analytic modeling to assist decision making in organizational innovations.<h4>Study setting/data sources</h4>Regarding an organizational innovation (shared care in hearing aid provision) available evidence from different sources was synthesized.<h4>Study design</h4>A probabilistic Markov model was constructed.<h4>Data collection/extraction</h4>We modeled the long-term cost-effectiveness of different organizational formats of shared care as oppo ...[more]

PMID: 18522663

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: The objective was to develop a decision aid (DA) to facilitate shared decision making (SDM) around whether to obtain computed tomography (CT) imaging in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected uncomplicated ureterolithiasis.Methods: We used evidence-based DA development methods, including qualitative methods and iterative stakeholder engagement, to develop and refine a DA. Guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), and a steering committee made up of stakeholders, we conducted interviews and focus groups with a purposive sample of patients, community members, emergency clinicians, and other stakeholders. We used an iterative process to code the transcripts and identify themes. We beta-tested the DA with patient-clinician dyads facing the decision in real time.Results: From August 2018 to August 2019, we engaged 102 participants in the design and iterative refinement of a DA focused on diagnostic options for patients with suspected ureterolithiasis. Forty-six were ED patients, community members, or patients with ureterolithiasis, and the remaining were emergency clinicians (doctors, residents, advanced practitioners), researchers, urologists, nurses, or other physicians. Patients and clinicians identified several key decisional needs including an understanding of accuracy, uncertainty, radiation exposure/cancer risk, and clear return precautions. Patients and community members identified facilitators to SDM, such as a checklist of signs and symptoms. Many stakeholders, including both patients and ED clinicians, expressed a strong pro-CT bias. A six-page DA was developed, iteratively refined, and beta-tested.Conclusions: Using stakeholder engagement and qualitative inquiry, we developed an evidence-based DA to facilitate SDM around the question of CT scan utilization in patients with suspected uncomplicated ureterolithiasis. Future research will test the efficacy of the DA in facilitating SDM.

Project description:BackgroundClinicians face challenges in promoting colorectal cancer screening due to multiple competing demands. A decision aid that clarifies patient preferences and improves decision quality can aid shared decision making and be effective at increasing colorectal cancer screening rates. However, exactly how such an intervention improves shared decision making is unclear. This study, funded by the National Cancer Institute, seeks to provide detailed understanding of how an interactive decision aid that elicits patient's risks and preferences impacts patient-clinician communication and shared decision making, and ultimately colorectal cancer screening adherence.Methods/designThis is a two-armed single-blinded randomized controlled trial with the target of 300 patients per arm. The setting is eleven community and three academic primary care practices in Metro Detroit. Patients are men and women aged between 50 and 75 years who are not up to date on colorectal cancer screening. ColoDATES Web (intervention arm), a decision aid that incorporates interactive personal risk assessment and preference clarification tools, is compared to a non-interactive website that matches ColoDATES Web in content but does not contain interactive tools (control arm). Primary outcomes are patient uptake of colorectal cancer screening; patient decision quality (knowledge, preference clarification, intent); clinician's degree of shared decision making; and patient-clinician concordance in the screening test chosen. Secondary outcome incorporates a Structural Equation Modeling approach to understand the mechanism of the causal pathway and test the validity of the proposed conceptual model based on Theory of Planned Behavior. Clinicians and those performing the analysis are blinded to arms.DiscussionThe central hypothesis is that ColoDATES Web will improve colorectal cancer screening adherence through improvement in patient behavioral factors, shared decision making between the patient and the clinician, and concordance between the patient's and clinician's preferred colorectal cancer screening test. The results of this study will be among the first to examine the effect of a real-time preference assessment exercise on colorectal cancer screening and mediators, and, in doing so, will shed light on the patient-clinician communication and shared decision making 'black box' that currently exists between the delivery of decision aids to patients and subsequent patient behavior.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01514786.

Project description:ObjectiveTo establish the acceptability and feasibility of delivering the Active Communication Education (ACE) programme to increase quality of life through improving communication and hearing aid use in the UK National Health Service.DesignRandomised controlled, open feasibility trial with embedded economic and process evaluations.SettingAudiology departments in two hospitals in two UK cities.ParticipantsTwelve hearing aid users aged 18 years or over who reported moderate or less than moderate benefit from their new hearing aid.InterventionsConsenting participants (along with a significant other) were to be randomised by a remote, centralised randomisation service in groups to ACE plus treatment-as-usual (intervention group) or treatment-as-usual only (control group).Primary outcome measuresThe primary outcomes were related to feasibility: recruitment, retention, treatment adherence and acceptability to participants and fidelity of treatment delivery.Secondary outcome measuresInternational Outcomes Inventory for Hearing Aids, Self-Assessment of Communication, EQ-5D-5L and Short-Form 36. Blinding of the participants and facilitator was not possible.ResultsTwelve hearing aid users and six significant others consented to take part. Eight hearing aid users were randomised: four to the intervention group; and four to treatment-as-usual only. Four significant others participated alongside the randomised participants. Recruitment to the study was very low and centres only screened 466 hearing aid users over the 15-month recruitment period, compared with the approximately 3500 anticipated. Only one ACE group and one control group were formed. ACE could be delivered and appeared acceptable to participants. We were unable to robustly assess attrition and attendance rates due to the low sample size.ConclusionsWhile ACE appeared acceptable to hearing aid users and feasible to deliver, it was not feasible to identify and recruit participants struggling with their hearing aids at the 3-month posthearing aid fitting point.Trial registration numberISRCTN28090877.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Care of patients with diabetes often occurs in the context of other chronic illness. Competing disease priorities and competing patient-physician priorities present challenges in the provision of care for the complex patient. Guideline implementation interventions to date do not acknowledge these intricacies of clinical practice. As a result, patients and providers are left overwhelmed and paralyzed by the sheer volume of recommendations and tasks. An individualized approach to the patient with diabetes and multiple comorbid conditions using shared decision-making (SDM) and goal setting has been advocated as a patient-centred approach that may facilitate prioritization of treatment options. Furthermore, incorporating interprofessional integration into practice may overcome barriers to implementation. However, these strategies have not been taken up extensively in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES:To systematically develop and test an interprofessional SDM and goal-setting toolkit for patients with diabetes and other chronic diseases, following the Knowledge to Action framework. METHODS:1. Feasibility study: Individual interviews with primary care physicians, nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, and patients with diabetes will be conducted, exploring their experiences with shared decision-making and priority-setting, including facilitators and barriers, the relevance of a decision aid and toolkit for priority-setting, and how best to integrate it into practice.2. Toolkit development: Based on this data, an evidence-based multi-component SDM toolkit will be developed. The toolkit will be reviewed by content experts (primary care, endocrinology, geriatricians, nurses, dietitians, pharmacists, patients) for accuracy and comprehensiveness.3. Heuristic evaluation: A human factors engineer will review the toolkit and identify, list and categorize usability issues by severity.4. Usability testing: This will be done using cognitive task analysis.5. Iterative refinement: Throughout the development process, the toolkit will be refined through several iterative cycles of feedback and redesign. DISCUSSION:Interprofessional shared decision-making regarding priority-setting with the use of a decision aid toolkit may help prioritize care of individuals with multiple comorbid conditions. Adhering to principles of user-centered design, we will develop and refine a toolkit to assess the feasibility of this approach.

Project description:IntroductionUp to 30% of hearing aids fitted to new adult clients are reported to be of low benefit and used intermittently or not at all. Evidence suggests that additional interventions paired with service-delivery redesign may help improve hearing aid use and benefit. The range of interventions available is limited. In particular, the efficacy of interventions like the Active Communication Education (ACE) programme that focus on improving communication success with hearing-impaired people and significant others, has not previously been assessed. We propose that improved communication outcomes associated with the ACE intervention, lead to an increased perception of hearing aid value and more realistic expectations associated with hearing aid use and ownership, which are reported to be key barriers and facilitators for successful hearing aid use. This study will assess the feasibility of delivering ACE and undertaking a definitive randomised controlled trial to evaluate whether ACE would be a cost-effective and acceptable way of increasing quality of life through improving communication and hearing aid use in a public health service such as the National Health Service.Methods and analysisThis will be a randomised controlled, open feasibility trial with embedded economic and process evaluations delivered in audiology departments in two UK cities. We aim to recruit 84 patients (and up to 84 significant others) aged 18 years and over, who report moderate or less than moderate benefit from their new hearing aid. The feasibility of a large-scale study and the acceptability of the ACE intervention will be measured by recruitment rates, treatment retention, follow-up rates and qualitative interviews.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval granted by South East Coast-Surrey Research Ethics Committee (16/LO/2012). Dissemination of results will be via peer-reviewed research publications both online and in print, conference presentations, posters, patient forums and Trust bulletins.Trial registration numberISRCTN28090877.

Dataset Information

Decision-analytic modeling to assist decision making in organizational innovation: the case of shared care in hearing aid provision.

Publications

Decision-analytic modeling to assist decision making in organizational innovation: the case of shared care in hearing aid provision.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets