Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2009 Mar;12(1):38-44.
doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00521.x.

A treatment decision aid may increase patient trust in the diabetes specialist. The Statin Choice randomized trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

A treatment decision aid may increase patient trust in the diabetes specialist. The Statin Choice randomized trial

Michael R Nannenga et al. Health Expect. 2009 Mar.

Abstract

Aims: Decision aids in practice may affect patient trust in the clinician, a requirement for optimal diabetes care. We sought to determine the impact of a decision aid to help patients with diabetes decide about statins (Statin Choice) on patients' trust in the clinician.

Methods: We randomized 16 diabetologists and 98 patients with type 2 diabetes referred to a subspecialty diabetes clinic to use the Statin Choice decision aid or a patient pamphlet about dyslipidaemia, and then to receive these materials from either the clinician during the visit or a researcher prior to the visit. Providers and patients were blinded to the study hypothesis. Immediately after the clinical encounter, patients completed a survey including questions on trust (range 0 to total trust = 100), knowledge, and decisional conflict. Researchers reviewed videotaped encounters and assessed patient participation (using the OPTION scale) and visit length.

Results: Overall mean trust score was 91 (median 97.2, IQR 86, 100). After adjustment for patient characteristics, results suggested greater total trust (trust = 100) with the decision aid [odds ratio (OR) 1.77, 95% CI 0.94, 3.35]. Total trust was associated with knowledge (for each additional knowledge point, OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1, 1.6), patient participation (for each additional point in the OPTION scale, OR 1.1, 95% CI 1.1, 1.2), and decisional conflict (for every 5-point decrease in conflict, OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2, 1.9). Total trust was not associated with visit length, which the decision aid did not significantly affect. There was no significant effect interaction across the trial factors.

Conclusions: Preliminary evidence suggests that decision aids do not have a large negative impact on trust in the physician and may increase trust through improvements in the decision-making process.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow of patients through the study protocol.

References

    1. McKinstry B, Ashcroft R, Car J, Freeman G, Sheikh A. Interventions for improving patients’ trust in doctors and groups of doctors. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2006;CD004134. - PubMed
    1. Pearson S, Raeke L. Patients’ trust in physicians: many theories, few measures, and little data. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2000; 15: 509–513. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rosser W, Kasperski J. The benefits of a trusting physician–patient relationship. The Journal of Family Practice, 2001; 50: 329–330. - PubMed
    1. Thom D. Stanford trust study physicians. Physician behaviors that predict patient trust. The Journal of Family Practice, 2001; 50: 323–328. - PubMed
    1. Trachtenberg F, Dugan E, Hall M. How patients’ trust relates to their involvement in medical care. The Journal of Family Practice, 2005; 54: 344–352. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances