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
. 2016 Jun 28;6(6):e011490.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011490.

Prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict: an analysis of five studies on decision-making in primary care

Philippe Thompson-Leduc  1 , Stéphane Turcotte  1 , Michel Labrecque  2 , France Légaré  2
Affiliations

Prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict: an analysis of five studies on decision-making in primary care

Philippe Thompson-Leduc et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objectives: Unresolved clinically significant decisional conflict (CSDC) in patients following a consultation with health professionals is often the result of inadequate patient involvement in decision-making and may result in poor outcomes. We sought to identify the prevalence of CSDC in studies on decision-making in primary care and to explore its risk factors.

Setting: We performed a secondary analysis of existing data sets from studies conducted in Primary Care Practice-Based Research Networks in Québec and Ontario, Canada.

Participants: Eligible studies included a patient-reported measure on the 16-item Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) following a decision made with a healthcare professional with no study design restriction.

Primary and secondary outcome measures: CSDC was defined as a score ≥25/100 on the DCS. The prevalence of CSDC was stratified by sex; and patient-level logistic regression analysis was performed to explore its potential risk factors. Data sets of studies were analysed individually and qualitatively compared.

Results: 5 projects conducted between 2003 and 2010 were included. They covered a range of decisions: prenatal genetic screening, antibiotics for acute respiratory infections and miscellaneous. Altogether, the 5 projects gathered data from encounters with a total of 1338 primary care patients (69% female; range of age 15-83). The prevalence of CSDC in patients varied across studies and ranged from 10.3% (95% CI 7.2% to 13.4%) to 31.1% (95% CI 26.6% to 35.6%). Across the 5 studies, risk factors of CSDC included being male, living alone and being 45 or older.

Conclusions: Prevalence of CSDC in patients who had enrolled in studies conducted in primary care contexts was substantial and appeared to vary according to the type of decision as well as to patient characteristics such as sex, living arrangement and age. Patients presenting risk factors of CSDC should be offered tools to increase their involvement in decision-making.

Keywords: Decisional conflict; PRIMARY CARE; shared decision making.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Carpenito-Moyet L. Individual nursing diagnoses: decisional conflict. In: Carpenito-Moyet L, ed. Nursing diagnosis: application to clinical practice. 13th edn Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2010:217–24.
    1. Janis I, Mann L. Decision making: a psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press, 1977.
    1. Knops AM, Goossens A, Ubbink DT et al. Interpreting patient decisional conflict scores: behavior and emotions in decisions about treatment. Med Decis Making 2013;33:78–84. 10.1177/0272989X12453500 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sun Q. Predicting downstream effects of high decisional conflict: meta-analyses of the decisional conflict scale. University of Ottawa, 2004.
    1. O'Connor AM, Tugwell P, Wells GA et al. A decision aid for women considering hormone therapy after menopause: decision support framework and evaluation. Patient Educ Couns 1998;33:267–79. 10.1016/S0738-3991(98)00026-3 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources