Paul C. Schroy|Karen M. Emmons|Ellen Peters|Julie T. Glick|Patricia A. Robinson|Maria A. Lydotes|Shamini Mylvanaman|Stephen Evans|Christine E. Chaisson|Michael Pignone|Marianne N. Prout|Peter Davidson|Timothy Heeren
The Impact of a Novel Computer-Based Decision Aid on Shared Decision Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening
Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Decision Research|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill|Boston University|Dana-Farber Cancer Institute|Decision Research|University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
background eliciting patients preferences within framework shared decision making sdm advocated strategy increasing colorectal cancer crc screening adherence objective assess effectiveness novel decision aid sdm primary care setting methods interactive computerbased decision aid crc screening developed evaluated within context randomized controlled trial total 665 averagerisk patients mean age 57 years 60 female 63 black 6 hispanic allocated 1 2 intervention arms decision aid alone decision aid plus personalized risk assessment control arm interventions delivered prior scheduled primary care visit outcome measures patient preferences knowledge satisfaction decisionmaking process sdmp concordance patient preference test ordered intentions evaluated using prestudypoststudy visit questionnaires electronic scheduling results overall 95 patients intervention arms identified preferred screening option based values placed individual test features mean cumulative knowledge sdmp intention scores significantly higher intervention groups compared control group concordance patient preference test ordered 59 patients preferred colonoscopy likely test ordered preferred alternative option 83 v 70 p lt 001 intention scores significantly higher test ordered reflected patient preferences conclusions interactive computerbased decision aid facilitates sdm overall effectiveness determined extent providers comply patient preferences