Randomized, controlled trial of an interactive videodisc decision aid for patients with ischemic heart disease

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.

[1]  V. Goel,et al.  Sex differences in the use of invasive coronary procedures in Ontario. , 1994, The Canadian journal of cardiology.

[2]  C. Hamm,et al.  A randomized study of coronary angioplasty compared with bypass surgery in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary disease. German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation (GABI) , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  L. Hillis,et al.  Coronary angioplasty compared with bypass grafting. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  Alan D. Lopez,et al.  Mortality by cause for eight regions of the world: Global Burden of Disease Study , 1997, The Lancet.

[5]  C. Naylor,et al.  Good judgement or sex bias in the referral of patients for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease? An exploratory study. , 1995, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[6]  I. Palacios,et al.  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. , 1993, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  P. Hartigan,et al.  A comparison of angioplasty with medical therapy in the treatment of single-vessel coronary artery disease. Veterans Affairs ACME Investigators. , 1992, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  B Freedman,et al.  Adding insult to injury. , 1986, Canadian doctor.

[9]  M. Starling,et al.  A randomized controlled trial of information‐giving to patients referred for coronary angiography: effects on outcomes of care , 1998, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[10]  Floyd J. Fowler,et al.  A Randomized Trial of a Multimedia Shared Decision-Making Program for Men Facing a Treatment Decision for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia , 1997 .

[11]  A. Mulley,et al.  Developing shared decision-making programs to improve the quality of health care. , 1992, QRB. Quality review bulletin.

[12]  F. Harrell,et al.  Continuing evolution of therapy for coronary artery disease. Initial results from the era of coronary angioplasty. , 1994, Circulation.

[13]  R. Deber,et al.  What role do patients wish to play in treatment decision making? , 1996, Archives of internal medicine.

[14]  T. Chalmers,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 , 1994, The Lancet.

[15]  J P Kassirer,et al.  Adding insult to injury. Usurping patients' prerogatives. , 1983, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  E. DeLong,et al.  Impact of an interactive video on decision making of patients with ischemic heart disease , 1996, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[17]  M. Kutner,et al.  A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST) , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  P. Hartigan,et al.  A Comparison of Angioplasty With Medical Therapy in the Treatment of Single-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease , 1992 .

[19]  L. Campeau.  Letter: Grading of angina pectoris. , 1976, Circulation.

[20]  M. Barry,et al.  Patient Reactions to a Program Designed to Facilitate Patient Participation in Treatment Decisions for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia , 1995, Medical care.

[21]  D. Pryor,et al.  Changes in Mortality after Myocardial Revascularization in the Elderly: The National Medicare Experience , 1994, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[22]  M. Kutner,et al.  A Randomized Trial Comparing Coronary Angioplasty with Coronary Bypass Surgery , 1994 .

[23]  Joy,et al.  Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial. , 1993, Lancet.

[24]  RITA-2 trial participants.  Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial , 1993, The Lancet.

[25]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) , 1992 .

[26]  C. Naylor,et al.  Trends in coronary artery bypass grafting in Ontario from 1981 to 1989. , 1993, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[27]  E H Wagner,et al.  The Effect of a Shared Decisionmaking Program on Rates of Surgery for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Pilot Results , 1995, Medical Care.

[28]  A. Gafni,et al.  A Bedside Decision Instrument To Elicit a Patient's Preference Concerning Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer , 1992, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[29]  C. Nair,et al.  Coronary artery bypass surgery in Canada. , 1990, Health reports.