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
  • [31] Shared decision making and associated factors among patients with psychotic disorders: a cross-sectional study
    Haugom, Espen W.
    Benth, Jurate Saltyte
    Stensrud, Bjorn
    Ruud, Torleif
    Clausen, Thomas
    Landheim, Anne Signe
    BMC PSYCHIATRY, 2023, 23 (01)
  • [32] Shared Decision-Making for Youth Psychotherapy: A Preliminary Randomized Clinical Trial on Facilitating Personalized Treatment
    Langer, David A.
    Holly, Lindsay E.
    Wills, Celia E.
    Tompson, Martha C.
    Chorpita, Bruce F.
    JOURNAL OF CONSULTING AND CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2022, 90 (01) : 29 - 38
  • [33] Systematic review of the effects of shared decision-making on patient satisfaction, treatment adherence and health status
    Joosten, E. A. G.
    DeFuentes-Merillas, L.
    de Weert, G. H.
    Sensky, T.
    van der Staak, C. P. F.
    de Jong, C. A. J.
    PSYCHOTHERAPY AND PSYCHOSOMATICS, 2008, 77 (04) : 219 - 226
  • [34] Shared Decision-Making: a Systematic Review Focusing on Mood Disorders
    Ludovic Samalin
    Jean-Baptiste Genty
    Laurent Boyer
    Jorge Lopez-Castroman
    Mocrane Abbar
    Pierre-Michel Llorca
    Current Psychiatry Reports, 2018, 20
  • [35] Shared Decision-Making: a Systematic Review Focusing on Mood Disorders
    Samalin, Ludovic
    Genty, Jean-Baptiste
    Boyer, Laurent
    Lopez-Castroman, Jorge
    Abbar, Mocrane
    Llorca, Pierre-Michel
    CURRENT PSYCHIATRY REPORTS, 2018, 20 (04)
  • [36] Developing the Disorders of Consciousness Guideline and Challenges of Integrating Shared Decision-Making Into Clinical Practice
    Armstrong, Melissa J.
    JOURNAL OF HEAD TRAUMA REHABILITATION, 2019, 34 (03) : 199 - 204
  • [37] Taking shared decision making for prostate cancer to the next level: Requirements for a Dutch treatment decision aid with personalized risks on side effects
    Hochstenbach, Laura M. J.
    Determann, Domino
    Fijten, Rianne R. R.
    Bloemen-van Gurp, Esther J.
    Verwey, Renee
    INTERNET INTERVENTIONS-THE APPLICATION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IN MENTAL AND BEHAVIOURAL HEALTH, 2023, 31
  • [38] Shared decision-making in outpatients with mental disorders: Patients′ preferences and associated factors
    Moran-Sanchez, Ines
    Gomez-Valles, Paula
    Angeles Bernal-Lopez, Maria
    Dolores Perez-Carceles, Maria
    JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2019, 25 (06) : 1200 - 1209
  • [39] Designing and evaluating an interprofessional shared decision-making and goal-setting decision aid for patients with diabetes in clinical care - systematic decision aid development and study protocol
    Yu, Catherine H.
    Stacey, Dawn
    Sale, Joanna
    Hall, Susan
    Kaplan, David M.
    Ivers, Noah
    Rezmovitz, Jeremy
    Leung, Fok-Han
    Shah, Baiju R.
    Straus, Sharon E.
    IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2014, 9
  • [40] Designing and evaluating an interprofessional shared decision-making and goal-setting decision aid for patients with diabetes in clinical care - systematic decision aid development and study protocol
    Catherine H Yu
    Dawn Stacey
    Joanna Sale
    Susan Hall
    David M Kaplan
    Noah Ivers
    Jeremy Rezmovitz
    Fok-Han Leung
    Baiju R Shah
    Sharon E Straus
    Implementation Science, 9