The effects of treatment as usual versus a computerized clinical decision aid on shared decision-making in the treatment of psychotic disorders

被引:0
|
作者
Roebroek, L. O. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Bruins, J. [1 ,2 ]
Boonstra, A. [4 ]
Delespaul, P. A. [5 ,6 ]
Castelein, S. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Lentis Res, Lentis Psychiat Inst, Hereweg 80, NL-9725 AG Groningen, Netherlands
[2] Univ Groningen, Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Rob Giel Res Ctr, Groningen, Netherlands
[3] Univ Groningen, Fac Behav & Social Sci, Groningen, Netherlands
[4] Univ Groningen, Fac Econ & Business, Groningen, Netherlands
[5] Maastricht Univ, Fac Psychiat & Psychol, Maastricht, Netherlands
[6] Mondriaan Mental Hlth Trust, Heerlen Maastricht, Netherlands
来源
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY | 2024年 / 38卷 / 01期
关键词
Decision support; Clinical decision aids; Shared decision making; Psychosis; Psychiatry; Routine outcome monitoring; SCHIZOPHRENIA; PEOPLE; CONFLICT; PROGRAM;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejpsy.2023.06.002
中图分类号
R749 [精神病学];
学科分类号
100205 ;
摘要
Background and objectives: People with psychotic disorders can experience a lack of active involvement in their decisional process. Clinical decision aids are shared decision -making tools which are currently rarely used in mental healthcare. We examined the effects of Treatment EAssist (TREAT), a computerized clinical decision aid in psychosis care, on shared decision -making and satisfaction with consultations as assessed by patients. Methods: A total of 187 patients with a psychotic disorder participated. They received either treatment as usual in the first phase (TAU1), TREAT in the second phase or treatment as usual in the third phase of the trial (TAU2). The Decisional Conflict Scale was used as primary outcome measure for shared decision -making and patient satisfaction as secondary outcome. Results: A linear mixed model analysis found no significant effects between TAU 1 (b = -0.54, SE = 2.01, p = 0.80) and TAU 2 (b = -1.66, SE = 2.63, p = 0.53) compared to TREAT on shared decision -making. High patient rated satisfaction with the consultations was found with no significant differences between TAU 1 (b = 1.48, SE = 1.14, p = 0.20) and TAU 2 (b = 2.26, SE = 1.33, p = 0.09) compared to TREAT. Conclusion: We expected TREAT to enhance shared decision -making without decreasing satisfaction with consultations. However, no significant differences on shared decision -making or satisfaction with consultations were found. Our findings suggest that TREAT is safe to implement in psychosis care, but more research is needed to fully understand its effects on the decisional process. (c) 2023 Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. on behalf of Sociedad Espanola de Psiquiatria y Salud Mental.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Perspectives of physicians and doulas on shared decision-making and decision counseling in the treatment of pregnant women with opioid use disorders
    Jeminiwa, Ruth
    Dadabaev, Fadel
    Kim, Heeyoung
    Gannon, Megan
    Myers, Ronald
    Abatemarco, Diane J.
    JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE USE & ADDICTION TREATMENT, 2025, 168
  • [22] COMPUTERIZED DATA MANAGEMENT AS AN AID TO CLINICAL DECISION-MAKING IN REHABILITATION-MEDICINE
    LEHMANN, JF
    WARREN, CG
    SMITH, W
    LARSON, J
    ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 1984, 65 (05): : 260 - 262
  • [23] Clinical decision-making and treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes
    Hellstrom-Lindberg, Eva S.
    Kroger, Nicolaus
    BLOOD, 2023, 142 (26) : 2268 - 2281
  • [24] CLINICAL DECISION-MAKING IN THE EVALUATION AND TREATMENT OF INSOMNIA
    EVERITT, DE
    AVORN, J
    BAKER, MW
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1990, 89 (03): : 357 - 362
  • [25] Implementation of shared decision-making for aortic stenosis: Development of a patient decision aid
    Lauck, S.
    Borregaard, B.
    Lewis, K.
    De Souza, I
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR NURSING, 2021, 20 : 29 - 29
  • [26] Shared Decision-Making: Process for Design and Implementation of a Decision Aid for Patients With Craniosynostosis
    Said, Abdullah M.
    Zubovic, Ema
    Pfeifauf, Kristin D.
    Skolnick, Gary B.
    Agboada, Jude
    Acayo-Laker, Penina
    Naidoo, Sybill D.
    Politi, Mary C.
    Smyth, Matthew
    Patel, Kamlesh B.
    CLEFT PALATE CRANIOFACIAL JOURNAL, 2024, 61 (01): : 138 - 143
  • [27] Shared Decision-Making for Rectal Cancer Treatment: A Path Forward
    Ivatury, Srinivas J.
    Durand, Marie-Anne
    Elwyn, Glyn
    DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, 2019, 62 (12) : 1412 - 1413
  • [28] Barriers and Promoters to Participation in the Era of Shared Treatment Decision-Making
    McCarter, Sarah P.
    Tariman, Joseph D.
    Spawn, Nadia
    Mehmeti, Enisa
    Bishop-Royse, Jessica
    Garcia, Ima
    Hartle, Lisa
    Szubski, Katharine
    WESTERN JOURNAL OF NURSING RESEARCH, 2016, 38 (10) : 1282 - 1297
  • [29] Prostate Cancer Screening Shared Decision-Making for Screening and Treatment
    Blackwelder, Russ
    Chessman, Alexander
    PRIMARY CARE, 2019, 46 (01): : 149 - +
  • [30] Shared Decision-making Doesn't Change Anticoagulation Treatment
    Slomski, Anita
    JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2020, 324 (12): : 1129 - 1129