Clinical Decision Support with or without Shared Decision Making to Improve Preventive Cancer Care: A Cluster-Randomized Trial

Autor: Thomas E. Elliott, Stephen E. Asche, Patrick J. O’Connor, Steven P. Dehmer, Heidi L. Ekstrom, Anjali R. Truitt, Ella A. Chrenka, Melissa L. Harry, Daniel M. Saman, Clayton I. Allen, Joseph A. Bianco, Laura A. Freitag, JoAnn M. Sperl-Hillen
Rok vydání: 2022
Předmět:
Zdroj: Med Decis Making
ISSN: 1552-681X
0272-989X
DOI: 10.1177/0272989x221082083
Popis: Background Innovative interventions are needed to address gaps in preventive cancer care, especially in rural areas. This study evaluated the impact of clinical decision support (CDS) with and without shared decision making (SDM) on cancer-screening completion. Methods In this 3-arm, parallel-group, cluster-randomized trial conducted at a predominantly rural medical group, 34 primary care clinics were randomized to clinical decision support (CDS), CDS plus shared decision making (CDS+SDM), or usual care (UC). The CDS applied web-based clinical algorithms identifying patients overdue for United States Preventive Services Task Force–recommended preventive cancer care and presented evidence-based recommendations to patients and providers on printouts and on the electronic health record interface. Patients in the CDS+SDM clinic also received shared decision-making tools (SDMTs). The primary outcome was a composite indicator of the proportion of patients overdue for breast, cervical, or colorectal cancer screening at index who were up to date on these 1 y later. Results From August 1, 2018, to March 15, 2019, 69,405 patients aged 21 to 74 y had visits at study clinics and 25,198 were overdue for 1 or more cancer screening tests at an index visit. At 12-mo follow-up, 9,543 of these (37.9%) were up to date on the composite endpoint. The adjusted, model-derived percentage of patients up to date was 36.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 34.0–39.1) in the UC group, 38.1% (95% CI: 35.5–40.9) in the CDS group, and 34.4% (95% CI: 31.8–37.2) in the CDS+SDM group. For all comparisons, the screening rates were higher than UC in the CDS group and lower than UC in the CDS+SDM group, although these differences did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion The CDS did not significantly increase cancer-screening rates. Exploratory analyses suggest a deeper understanding of how SDM and CDS interact to affect cancer prevention decisions is needed. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02986230, December 6, 2016.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: