Understanding why decision aids work: linking process with outcome

被引:98
作者
Bekker, HL
Hewison, J
Thornton, JG
机构
[1] Univ Leeds, Sch Med, Acad Unit Psychiat & Behav Sci, Leeds LS2 9LT, W Yorkshire, England
[2] Univ Leeds, Ctr Reprod Growth & Dev, Leeds LS2 9LT, W Yorkshire, England
关键词
decision making; decision aid; prenatal diagnosis; Down's syndrome;
D O I
10.1016/S0738-3991(03)00056-9
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Decision aids help patients make treatment choices. There is little empirical evidence to explain how they work. The results from this randomised controlled trial comparing routine with decision-aided consultations in the prenatal diagnosis for Down's syndrome context are used to describe the strategies employed during decision making, to assess the impact of a decision aid on decision processes, and to investigate decision process and outcome associations. Data were elicited from two content analyses of consultation transcripts and questionnaires assessing knowledge, anxiety, decisional conflict, reasons, and information usefulness. 68/106 women completed measures at consultation and follow-up. Decision-aided women employed more cognitive and emotional strategies during decision making. More negative evaluations during decision making were associated with better outcomes. Decision-aided consultations facilitated the employment of strategies associated with more effective choices. These consultations take longer and elicit greater expressions of negative affect, so may be less rewarding encounters for health professionals. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:323 / 329
页数:7
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]  
Baron J., 1994, THINKING DECIDING
[2]  
BEKKER H, 1999, INFORMED PATIENT DEC
[3]  
BEKKER HL, 1999, THESIS U LEEDS UK
[4]  
Carroll J.S., 1990, DECISION RES FIELD G
[6]  
Elwyn G, 1999, BRIT J GEN PRACT, V49, P477
[7]   Measuring the involvement of patients in shared decision-making: a systematic review of instruments [J].
Elwyn, G ;
Edwards, A ;
Mowle, S ;
Wensing, M ;
Wilkinson, C ;
Kinnersley, P ;
Grol, R .
PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2001, 43 (01) :5-22
[8]   BEYOND EXPECTED UTILITY - RETHINKING BEHAVIORAL DECISION RESEARCH [J].
FRISCH, D ;
CLEMEN, RT .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1994, 116 (01) :46-54
[9]   ASSESSING THE ACCURACY OF DECISIONS [J].
FRISCH, D ;
JONES, SK .
THEORY & PSYCHOLOGY, 1993, 3 (01) :115-135
[10]   Patient satisfaction with health care decisions: The satisfaction with decision scale [J].
HolmesRovner, M ;
Kroll, J ;
Schmitt, N ;
Rovner, DR ;
Breer, ML ;
Rothert, ML ;
Padonu, G ;
Talarczyk, G .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 1996, 16 (01) :58-64