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
. 2014 Jun 7:7:347.
doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-7-347.

Investigating active ingredients in a complex intervention: a nested study within the Patient and Decision Aids (PANDAs) randomised controlled trial for people with type 2 diabetes

Ian Brown  1 , Alastair Bradley, Chirk Jenn Ng, Brigitte Colwell, Nigel Mathers
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Investigating active ingredients in a complex intervention: a nested study within the Patient and Decision Aids (PANDAs) randomised controlled trial for people with type 2 diabetes

Ian Brown et al. BMC Res Notes. .

Abstract

Background: Randomised trials provide evidence that patient decision aids improve outcomes with respect to patient knowledge, involvement and satisfaction in decision making. It is less clear how these complex interventions are implemented within patient-clinician interactions and which components are active for improving decision processes. To investigate the experiences of using a diabetes treatment decision aid and to explore how components within a complex intervention influenced the decision making process.

Methods: A pragmatic mixed methods study nested within the PANDAs cluster randomised trial of a patient decision aid. Themes inductively derived from interviews and observation of consultations with further triangulation with results of decision quality and involvement measurements and case analyses.

Results: The decision aid intervention was employed flexibly within the consultation with both the patient and clinician active in marshalling elements. The decision aid improved processing and organization of information needed for decision making within the consultation interaction. It also improved decision quality by preparing the patient for active involvement within the clinical consultation.

Conclusion: The intervention was acceptable, flexible and readily implemented in primary care consultations. The decision aid was effective in facilitating cognitive processing. The intervention also facilitated rehearsal in preparation for active roles in a shared decision process.

Trial registration: Trials Register Number: ISRCTN14842077. Date registered: 24.06.2010.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Salzburg Global Seminar. The Salzburg Statement on Shared Decision Making. Salzburg: Salzburg Global Seminar; 2010.
    1. DaSilva D. Helping People Share Decision Making. London: The Health Foundation; 2012.
    1. Edwards A, Elwyn G. Shared Decision-Making in Health Care: Achieving Evidence-Based Patient Choice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009.
    1. Stacy D, Bennett C, Barry M, Col N, Eden KB Holmes-Rovner M, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Lyddiatt A, Legare F, Thompson R. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011. p. CD001431. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub3. - PubMed
    1. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Mitchie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:979–983. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a979. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data