Comparing traditional and participatory dissemination of a shared decision making intervention (ADAPT-NC): a cluster randomized trial
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND Asthma is a common disease that affects people of all ages and has significant morbidity and mortality. Poor outcomes and health disparities related to asthma result in part from the difficulty of disseminating new evidence and care delivery methods such as shared decision making (SDM) into clinical practice. METHODS/DESIGN This non-blinded study will randomize 30 primary care clinics in NC stratified by four PBRNs. We will test dissemination across these practices using a facilitator-led participatory approach to dissemination (FLOW), a novel method of participatory dissemination involving key principles of community-based participatory research, and a more typical "lunch and learn" dissemination method. Specifically, we will use cluster randomization to assign each of the 30 practices to one of three arms: (1) control, no dissemination; (2) traditional dissemination, one didactic session a year and distribution of educational material; and (3) FLOW dissemination. We hypothesize that at the unit of randomization, the clinic, patients in the FLOW dissemination arm will be more likely to share in their treatment decisions compared to patients in the traditional dissemination or control arms. All outcomes will be measured at the level of the clinic. Adoption of the SDM approach will be evaluated by 1) asthma exacerbations, 2) level of patient involvement in the decision making process, and 3) qualitative assessments from patients and providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION The trial was registered on January 27, 2014 through the United States National Institutes of Health's ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02047929 and funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI).
منابع مشابه
Controlling Chronic Diseases Through Evidence-Based Decision Making: A Group-Randomized Trial
INTRODUCTION Although practitioners in state health departments are ideally positioned to implement evidence-based interventions, few studies have examined how to build their capacity to do so. The objective of this study was to explore how to increase the use of evidence-based decision-making processes at both the individual and organization levels. METHODS We conducted a 2-arm, group-random...
متن کاملAdapting community based participatory research (CBPR) methods to the implementation of an asthma shared decision making intervention in ambulatory practices
OBJECTIVE Translating research findings into clinical practice is a major challenge to improve the quality of healthcare delivery. Shared decision making (SDM) has been shown to be effective and has not yet been widely adopted by health providers. This paper describes the participatory approach used to adapt and implement an evidence-based asthma SDM intervention into primary care practices. ...
متن کاملShared decision making PLUS – a cluster-randomized trial with inpatients suffering from schizophrenia (SDM-PLUS)
BACKGROUND Shared decision making (SDM) is a model of how doctors and patients interact with each other. It aims at changing the traditional power asymmetry between doctors and patients by strengthening the exchange of information and the decisional position of the patient. Although SDM is generally welcomed by mental health patients as well as by mental health professionals its implementation ...
متن کاملEffect of Individual Counseling on the Participation Rate of Pregnant Mothers in Decision Making on the Treatment Process: Clinical Trial
Aim: Due to the high Sensitivity of pregnancy and the vulnerability of mothers during this period, their participation in clinical decisions is very important. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effect of individual counseling on the participation of pregnant women in decision making on the treatment process. Methods & Materials: This clinical trial study was carried out on 190 pre...
متن کاملTranslating comparative effectiveness of depression medications into practice by comparing the depression medication choice decision aid to usual care: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
BACKGROUND Comparative effectiveness research (CER) documents important differences in antidepressants in terms of efficacy, safety, cost, and burden to the patient. Decision aids can adapt this evidence to help patients participate in making informed choices. In turn, antidepressant therapy will more likely reflect patients' values and context, leading to improved adherence and mood outcomes. ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره 9 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2014