Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of the Ischemic Heart Disease Shared Decision-Making Program (IHD SDP) an interactive videodisc designed to assist patients in the decision-making process involving treatment choices for ischemic heart disease, on patient decision-making.
DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial.
SETTING: The Toronto Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred forty ambulatory patients with ischemic heart disease amenable to elective revascularization and ongoing medical therapy.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was patient satisfaction with the decision-making process. This was measured using the 12-item Decision-Making Process Questionnaire that was developed and validated in a randomized trial of the benign prostatic hyperplasia SDP. Secondary outcomes included patient knowledge (measured using 20 questions about knowledge deemed necessary for an informed treatment decision), treatment decision, patient-angiographer agreement on decision, and general health scores. Outcomes were measured at the time of treatment decision and/or at 6 months follow-up. Shared decision-making program scores were similar for the intervention and control group (71% and 70%, respectively; 95% confidence interval [CI] for 1% difference, −3% to 7%). The intervention group had higher knowledge scores (75% vs 62%; 95% CI for 13% difference, 8% to 18%). The intervention group chose to pursue revascularization less often (58% vs 75% for the controls; 95% CI for 17% difference, 4% to 31%). At 6 months, 52% of the intervention group and 66% of the controls had undergone revascularization (95% CI for 14% difference, 0% to 28%). General health and angina scores were not different between the groups at 6 months. Exposure to the IHD SDP resulted in more patient-angiographer disagreement about treatment decisions.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in satisfaction with decision-making process scores between the IHD SDP and usual practice groups. The IHD SDP patients were more knowledgeable, underwent less revascularization (interventional therapies), and demonstrated increased patient decision-making autonomy without apparent impact on quality of life.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Murray CJL, Lopez AD. Mortality by cause for eight regions of the world: global burden of disease study. Lancet. 1997;349:1269–76.
Peters S, Chagani K, Paddon P, Nair C. Coronary artery bypass surgery in Canada. Health Reports. 1990;2:9–26.
Ugnat AM, Naylor CD. Trends in coronary artery bypass grafting in Ontario from 1981 to 1989. CMAJ. 1993;148:569–75.
Peterson ED, Jollis JG, Bebchuk JD, et al. Changes in mortality after myocardial revascularization in the elderly: the national Medicare experience. Ann Intern Med. 1994;121:919–27.
Yusuf S, Zucker D, Peduzzi P, et al. Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration [published erratum appears in Lancet 1994; 344:1446]. Lancet. 1994;344:563–70. Comments.
King SB 3rd, Lemob NJ, Weintraub WS, et al. A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST). New Engl J Med. 1994;331:1044–50. Comments.
Parisi AF, Folland ED, Hartigan P. A comparison of angioplasty with medical therapy in the treatment of single-vessel coronary artery disease. Veterans Affairs ACME Investigators. New Engl J Med. 1992;326:10–6. Comments.
Rodriguez A, Boullon F, Perez-Balino N, Paviotti C, Liprandi MI, Palacios IF. Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): in-hospital results and 1-year follow-up. ERACI Group. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22:1060–7.
Hamm CW, Reimers J, Ischinger T, Rupprecht HJ, Berger J, Bleifeld W. A randomized study of coronary angioplasty compared with bypass surgery in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary disease. German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation (GABI). New Engl J Med. 1994;331:1037–43. Comments.
Hillis LD, Rutherford JD. Coronary angioplasty compared with bypass grafting. New Engl J Med. 1994;331:1086–7. Editorial; Comment.
Mark DB, Nelson CL, Califf RM, et al. Continuing evolution of therapy for coronary artery disease. Initial results from the era of coronary angioplasty. Circulation. 1994;89:2015–25.
Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial. Lancet. 1993; 341:473–80.
Deber RB, Kraetschmer N, Irvine J. What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making? Arch Intern Med. 1996;156:1414–20.
Kassirer JP. Adding insult to injury. Usurping patients’ prerogatives. New Engl J Med. 1983;308:898–901.
Kasper JF, Mulley AG Jr, Wennberg JE. Developing shared decision-making programs to improve the quality of health care. QRB Quality Review Bull. 1992;58:183–90. Comment.
Levine MN, Gafni A, Markham B, MacFarlane D. A bedside decision instrument to elicit a patient’s preference concerning adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Ann Intern Med. 1992;117:53–8. Comment.
Barry MJ, Fowler FJ Jr, Mulley AG Jr, Henderson JV Jr, Wennberg JE. Patient reactions to a program designed to facilitate patient participation in treatment decisions for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Med Care. 1995;33:771–82.
Wagner EH, Barrett P, Barry MJ, Barlow W, Fowler FJ Jr. The effect of a shared decision-making program on rates of surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Pilot results. Med Care. 1995;33:765–70.
Barry MJ, Cherkin DC, Chang Y, Fowler FJ Jr, Skates S. A randomized trial of a multimedia shared decision-making program for men facing a treatment decision for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Dis Manage Clin Outcomes. 1997;1:5–14.
Liao L, Jollis JG, DeLong ER, Peterson ED, Morris KG, Mark DB. Impact of an interactive video on decision making of patients with ischemic heart disease. J Gen Intern Med. 1996;11:373–6.
Bernstein SJ, Skarupski KA, Grayson CE, Starling MR, Bates ER, Eagle KA. A randomized controlled trial of information-giving to patients referred for coronary angiography: effects on outcomes of care. Health Expectations. 1998;1:50–61.
Pryor DB, DeLong ER. Final Report: Ischemic Heart Disease Program Outcomes Research Team Project (IHD Port) HS 06503. Durham, NC: Duke University Medical Center; 1997:69.
Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473–83.
Campeau L. Grading of angina pectoris. Circulation. 1976;54:522–3. Letter.
Cohen J. Statistical Peer Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences. 2nd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
Jaglal SB, Goel V, Naylor CD. Sex differences in the use of invasive coronary procedures in Ontario. Can J Card. 1994;10:239–44. Review.
Jaglal SB, Slaughter PM, Baigrie RS, Morgan CD, Naylor CD. Good judgment or sex bias in the referral of patients for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease? An exploratory study. CMAJ. 1995;152:873–80.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was funded in part by the Ontario Ministry of Health and the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario (Grant NA3039). Dr. Llewellyn-Thomas is a National Health Scholar supported by the National Health Research & Development Program of Health Canada.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Morgan, M.W., Deber, R.B., Llewellyn-Thomas, H.A. et al. Randomized, controlled trial of an interactive videodisc decision aid for patients with ischemic heart disease. J GEN INTERN MED 15, 685–693 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.91139.x
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.91139.x