Influence of decision aids on patient preferences for anticoagulant therapy: a randomized trial
22 May 2007-Canadian Medical Association Journal (Canadian Medical Association)-Vol. 176, Iss: 11, pp 1583-1587
TL;DR: The decision aid led to significant improvement in patients' knowledge regardless of the format or graphic representation of data, and Revealing the name of the treatment options led tosignificant shifts in declared treatment preferences.
Abstract: Background: Decision aids have been shown to be useful in selected situations to assist patients in making treatment decisions. Important features such as the format of decision aids and their graphic presentation of data on benefits and harms of treatment options have not been well studied. Methods: In a randomized trial with a 3 × 2 factorial design, we investigated the effects of decision aid format (decision board, decision booklet with audiotape, or interactive computer program) and graphic presentation of data (pie graph or pictogram) on patients9 comprehension and choices of 3 treatments for anticoagulation, identified initially as “treatment A” (warfarin), “treatment B” (acetylsalicylic acid) and “treatment C” (no treatment). Patients aged 65 years or older without known atrial fibrillation and not currently taking warfarin were included. The effect of blinding to the treatment name was tested in a before–after comparison. The primary outcome was change in comprehension score, as assessed by the Atrial Fibrillation Information Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were treatment choice, level of satisfaction with the decision aid, and decisional conflict. Results: Of 102 eligible patients, 98 completed the study. Comprehension scores (maximum score 10) increased by an absolute mean of 3.1 ( p p Interpretation: The decision aid led to significant improvement in patients9 knowledge regardless of the format or graphic representation of data. Revealing the name of the treatment options led to significant shifts in declared treatment preferences.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: More research on patient-focused interventions that have been trialed to support vulnerable patient populations taking oral anticoagulants such as older persons, those with limited health literacy, and those from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds are needed.
Abstract: The aim of this review was to identify patient-focused interventions that have been trialed to support vulnerable patient populations taking oral anticoagulants (warfarin and the direct-acting oral...
9 citations
TL;DR: A prospective practice audit of 920 patients presenting with ischemic stroke and a history of atrial fibrillation to 12 hospitals in Ontario, Canada highlights the severity of stroke in patients with NVAF.
Abstract: See related article, pages 235–240.
In 1989, the Copenhagen AFASAK study1 reported results from the first randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating adjusted-dose warfarin and aspirin in the prevention of stroke for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Like the 5 randomized, placebo-controlled trials that came after it,2 the Copenhagen AFASAK study demonstrated a reduction in embolic events in patients taking warfarin. Today, the weight of evidence from 18 trials comparing warfarin with either placebo or antiplatelet drugs overwhelmingly favors the use of warfarin for stroke prevention in NVAF.2,3
In 20 years since AFASAK and 10 years since the first meta-analysis of trials testing the effect of warfarin on stroke risk,4 anticoagulation has remained underused and opportunities for preventing fatal and disabling stroke have been frequently missed.5–12 In this issue of Stroke , Gladstone and colleagues5 report a prospective practice audit of 920 patients presenting with ischemic stroke and a history of atrial fibrillation to 12 hospitals in Ontario, Canada. All patients had a high risk of stroke. Approximately 60% of the 597 patients with a first-ever stroke were not receiving warfarin at the time of admission. Of those receiving warfarin, approximately three fourths had a subtherapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) recorded on admission. A further 323 patients with a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack arguably had the most to gain from warfarin. Approximately 40% of this group was not on warfarin at the time of admission, whereas 70% of those using warfarin had subtherapeutic INR levels. These findings are disturbing because all patients included in the audit were judged to be “ideal candidates” for warfarin, living independently without known contraindications to anticoagulation. Gladstone et al5 highlight the severity of stroke in patients with NVAF. Eighty percent of the patients with a first-ever stroke …
9 citations
TL;DR: A paucity of data exists to help patients engage in the treatment decisions for venous thromboembolism, and future studies of additional VTE clinical decisions with longer-term clinical outcomes appear necessary.
8 citations
TL;DR: To facilitate valid preference elicitation in the context of geriatric polypharmacy, future research should focus on suitable characteristics of existing techniques to develop new measurement approaches for this increasingly relevant population.
Abstract: Purpose The aim of this systematic review was to identify methods used to assess medication preferences in older adults and evaluate their advantages and disadvantages with respect to their applicability to the context of multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Material and methods Three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO) were searched. Eligible studies elicited individual treatment or outcome preferences in a context that involved long-term pharmacological treatment options. We included studies with a study population aged ≥ 65 years and/or with a mean or median age of ≥ 75 years. Qualitative studies, studies assessing preferences for only two different treatments, and studies targeting preferences for life-sustaining treatments were excluded. The identified preference measurement methods were evaluated based on four criteria (time budget, cognitive demand, variety of pharmacological aspects, and link with treatment strategies) judged to be relevant for the elicitation of patient preferences in polypharmacy. Results Sixty articles met the eligibility criteria and were included in the narrative synthesis. Fifty-five different instruments to assess patient preferences, based on 24 different elicitation methods, were identified. The most commonly applied preference measurement techniques were "medication willingness" (description of a specific medication with inquiry of the participant's willingness to take it), discrete choice experiments, Likert scale-based questionnaires, and rank prioritization. The majority of the instruments were created for disease-specific or context-specific settings. Only three instruments (Outcome Prioritization Tool, a complex intervention, "MediMol" questionnaire) dealt with the broader issue of geriatric multimorbidity. Only seven of the identified tools showed somewhat favorable characteristics for a potential use of the respective method in the context of polypharmacy. Conclusion Up to now, few instruments have been specifically designed for the assessment of medication preferences in older patients with multimorbidity. To facilitate valid preference elicitation in the context of geriatric polypharmacy, future research should focus on suitable characteristics of existing techniques to develop new measurement approaches for this increasingly relevant population.
8 citations
TL;DR: Concerns about anticoagulant concerns should be targeted at AF clinics, with an aim to reduce nonadherence and potentially modifiable adverse outcomes such as stroke.
Abstract: BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES This study examined whether beliefs about medicines, drug attitudes, and depression independently predicted anticoagulant and antiarrhythmic adherence (focusing on the implementation phase of nonadherence) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS This cross-sectional study was part of a larger longitudinal study. Patients with AF (N = 118) completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-8. The Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire, Drug Attitude Inventory, and Morisky-Green-Levine Medication Adherence Scale (self-report adherence measure), related to anticoagulants and antiarrhythmics, were also completed. Correlation and multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS There were no significant differences in nonadherence to anticoagulants or antiarrhythmics. Greater concerns (r = 0.23, P = .01) were significantly, positively associated with anticoagulant nonadherence only. Depression and drug attitudes were not significantly associated with anticoagulant/antiarrhythmic adherence. Predictors reliably distinguished adherers and nonadherers to anticoagulant medication in the regression model, explaining 14% of the variance, but only concern beliefs (odds ratio, 1.20) made a significant independent contribution to prediction (χ = 11.40, P = .02, with df = 4). When entered independently into a regression model, concerns (odds ratio, 1.24) significantly explained 10.3% of the variance (χ = 7.97, P = .01, with df = 1). Regressions were not significant for antiarrhythmic medication (P = .30). CONCLUSIONS Specifying medication type is important when examining nonadherence in chronic conditions. Concerns about anticoagulants, rather than depression, were significantly associated with nonadherence to anticoagulants but not antiarrhythmics. Anticoagulant concerns should be targeted at AF clinics, with an aim to reduce nonadherence and potentially modifiable adverse outcomes such as stroke.
8 citations
Cites background from "Influence of decision aids on patie..."
...Once unblinded, 46% of patients switched to a different medication.(60) Hypothesis 3, stating that symptomatic patientswould be more adherent to antiarrhythmics than asymptomatic patients, was not supported....
[...]
References
More filters
TL;DR: A simplified, scored form of the cognitive mental status examination, the “Mini-Mental State” (MMS) which includes eleven questions, requires only 5-10 min to administer, and is therefore practical to use serially and routinely.
76,181 citations
"Influence of decision aids on patie..." refers background in this paper
...Eligible participants were at least 65 years of age, able to read and understand English and cognitively intact.(44) Patients were excluded from the study if they had received a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation or if they were currently taking warfarin....
[...]
01 Jan 2002
TL;DR: The Mini-Mental State (MMS) as mentioned in this paper is a simplified version of the standard WAIS with eleven questions and requires only 5-10 min to administer, and is therefore practical to use serially and routinely.
Abstract: EXAMINATION of the mental state is essential in evaluating psychiatric patients.1 Many investigators have added quantitative assessment of cognitive performance to the standard examination, and have documented reliability and validity of the several “clinical tests of the sensorium”.2*3 The available batteries are lengthy. For example, WITHERS and HINTON’S test includes 33 questions and requires about 30 min to administer and score. The standard WAIS requires even more time. However, elderly patients, particularly those with delirium or dementia syndromes, cooperate well only for short periods.4 Therefore, we devised a simplified, scored form of the cognitive mental status examination, the “Mini-Mental State” (MMS) which includes eleven questions, requires only 5-10 min to administer, and is therefore practical to use serially and routinely. It is “mini” because it concentrates only on the cognitive aspects of mental functions, and excludes questions concerning mood, abnormal mental experiences and the form of thinking. But within the cognitive realm it is thorough. We have documented the validity and reliability of the MMS when given to 206 patients with dementia syndromes, affective disorder, affective disorder with cognitive impairment “pseudodementia”5T6), mania, schizophrenia, personality disorders, and in 63 normal subjects.
70,887 citations
TL;DR: To determine the morbidity and mortality from childhood Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) meningitis in a well defined population, a large number of cases are diagnosed with Hib.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE To determine the morbidity and mortality from childhood Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) meningitis in a well defined population. DESIGN Retrospective survey 1985-1987 and prospective surveillance of hospital laboratories 1989-1990. Information on outcome of meningitis was obtained from hospital records and attending physicians and, in 1989-1990, from a survey of the children's parents. SETTING Sydney Statistical Division, which had a population of children aged 0-4 years of 229,165 in 1986 and 263,758 in 1990. PATIENTS Eligible children were aged from one month to four years and had clinical and microbiological evidence of Hib meningitis on standard criteria. RESULTS There were 229 eligible children. Twelve were excluded (seven died and five had pre-existing neurological deficits). A neurological deficit was detected at the time of hospital discharge in 45 patients (21%) and persisted for 12 months or longer in 29 patients (13%). Follow-up information was available for 165 (96%) children who were normal at the time of hospital discharge and persistent deficits were recorded in 12 (7%) of these children. Forty-one children (19%) had readily recognisable neurological or hearing problems: nine (4%) had persistent severe neurological deficits and seven (3%) had severe hearing loss requiring hearing aids or a cochlear implant. Age had a significant influence on outcome. The youngest children were significantly more likely to be admitted to intensive care. Severe neurological deficits showed a significant negative trend with increasing age (P = 0.03). Severe unilateral or bilateral sensorineural loss (odds ratio [OR] 8.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-81) and ataxia at discharge (OR 13.3, 95% CI 2.8-128) were noticeably more common in children over two years of age, with a significant positive trend (P < or = 0.001) with increasing age. Patients requiring intensive care were much more likely to have an adverse outcome, particularly if positive pressure ventilation was needed. CONCLUSIONS These data provide population-based estimates of the minimum incidence of adverse outcomes from Hib meningitis in an urban community with good access to medical services. This is important in assessing the impact of Hib vaccination, as meningitis is responsible for most of the long-term morbidity from childhood invasive Hib disease. Determination of the relationship between morbidity and age is important for assessing alternative vaccine strategies.
8,476 citations
TL;DR: The incidence of thromboembolic complications and vascular mortality were significantly lower in the warfarin group than in the aspirin and placebo groups, which did not differ significantly.
1,636 citations
TL;DR: Aspirin and warfarin are both effective in reducing ischemic stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation and patients with nonrheumatic atrialfibrillation who can safely take either aspirin or warfarIn should receive prophylactic antithrombotic therapy to reduce the risk of stroke.
Abstract: BACKGROUND Atrial fibrillation in the absence of rheumatic valvular disease is associated with a fivefold to sevenfold increased risk of ischemic stroke.
METHODS AND MAIN RESULTS The Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Study, a multicenter, randomized trial, compared 325 mg/day aspirin (double-blind) or warfarin with placebo for prevention of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism (primary events), and included 1,330 inpatients and outpatients with constant or intermittent atrial fibrillation. During a mean follow-up of 1.3 years, the rate of primary events in patients assigned to placebo was 6.3% per year and was reduced by 42% in those assigned to aspirin (3.6% per year; p = 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 9-63%). In the subgroup of warfarin-eligible patients (most less than 76 years old), warfarin dose-adjusted to prolong prothrombin time to 1.3-fold to 1.8-fold that of control reduced the risk of primary events by 67% (warfarin versus placebo, 2.3% versus 7.4% per year; p = 0.01; 95% confidence interval, 27-85%). Primary events or death were reduced 58% (p = 0.01) by warfarin and 32% (p = 0.02) by aspirin. The risk of significant bleeding was 1.5%, 1.4%, and 1.6% per year in patients assigned to warfarin, aspirin, and placebo, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS Aspirin and warfarin are both effective in reducing ischemic stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. Because warfarin-eligible patients composed a subset of all aspirin-eligible patients, the magnitude of reduction in events by warfarin versus aspirin cannot be compared. Too few events occurred in warfarin-eligible patients to directly assess the relative benefit of aspirin compared with warfarin, and the trial is continuing to address this issue. Patients with nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation who can safely take either aspirin or warfarin should receive prophylactic antithrombotic therapy to reduce the risk of stroke.
1,594 citations