Effectiveness of patient decision aid supported shared decision-making intervention in in-person and virtual hybrid pulmonary rehabilitation in older adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A pilot randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Introduction

Tele-pulmonary rehabilitation is increasingly advocated but cannot completely substitute for in-person services for chronic conditions. Adherence to Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) remains low in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Shared decision-making (SDM) promotes patients' participation in PR decisions and helps patients and healthcare providers to jointly make decisions that patients are informed and aligned with patient preferences and values, which are critical for patient adherence to PR.

Objective

This study aimed to develop a hybrid in-person and virtual model of home-based PR services for older COPD patients and study the effectiveness of the patient decision aid (PDA)-supported recurring SDM intervention on patient adherence to PR, rehabilitation outcomes, and decision-related outcomes, as well as to explore the mechanisms of the intervention on PR adherence.

Methods

A total of 78 older COPD patients were randomly assigned to the PR group (n = 39) or PDA-PR group (n = 39). Both groups were conducted hybrid in-person and virtual PR intervention for 3 months. The primary outcomes were patients’ quality of life and PR adherence. The secondary outcomes were dyspnea symptoms, exercise self-efficacy, knowledge, and decision-related outcomes.

Results

A total of 72 participants completed the 3-month PR program. There were statistically significant differences in PR adherence (p = 0.033), COPD assessment test (CAT) scores (p = 0.016), PR knowledge (p < 0.001), decision self-efficacy (p < 0.001), decision conflict (p < 0.001), and decision regret scores (p = 0.027) between the two groups. The modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea scale (mMRC) score was significantly decreased only in PDA-PR group (p = 0.011). No statistically significant differences were observed in St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score (p = 0.078), Exercise Self-Regulatory Efficacy Scale (Ex-SRES) score (p = 0.29) and COPD knowledge (p = 0.086) between the two groups. PR value score had a significant effect on adherence to PR (p = 0.007) and CAT score (p = 0.028).

Conclusions

PDA supported recurring SDM intervention was helpful in maintaining older COPD patients’ PR adherence and had advantages in improving quality of life, enhancing PR knowledge, decision self-efficacy, and reducing decision conflict and decision regret, but did not improve SGRQ and Ex-SRES. PR value score influenced patients’ rehabilitation adherence and quality of life.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR): ChiCTR1900028563; http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/default.aspx.

Keywords

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease randomized controlled trial shared decision-making patient decision aid telemedicine

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Soriano

Kendrick

Paulson

, et al. Prevalence and attributable health burden of chronic respiratory diseases, 1990–2017: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet Resp Med 2020; 8: 585–596.

Duan

Hao

Yang

. Air pollution and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Chronic Dis Transl Med 2020; 6: 260–269.

The World Health Organization. Global Health Estimates: Life expectancy and leading causes of death and disability, www.who.int/data/gho/data/themes/mortality-and-global-health-estimates (2022, accessed 5 October 5 2022).

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. Global Strategy for Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of COPD: 2022 Report, https://goldcopd.org/2022-gold-reports-2/ (2021, accessed 5 October 2022).

Cieza

Causey

Kamenov

, et al. Global estimates of the need for rehabilitation based on the global burden of disease study 2019: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2019. Lancet 2020; 396: 2006–2017.

Spruit

Pitta

Garvey

, et al. Differences in content and organisational aspects of pulmonary rehabilitation programmes. Eur Respir J 2014; 43: 1326–1337.

Stefan

Pekow

Priya

, et al. Association between initiation of pulmonary rehabilitation and rehospitalizations in patients hospitalized with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Resp Crit Care 2021; 204: 1015–1023.

Leung

Niikura

Yang

CWT

, et al. COVID-19 and COPD. Eur Respir J 2020; 56: 2002108.

Cox

Dal Corso

Hansen

, et al. Telerehabilitation for chronic respiratory disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 1: CD013040.

10.

Vitacca

Montini

Comini

. How will telemedicine change clinical practice in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease? Ther Adv Respir Dis 2018; 12: 1753465818754778.

11.

Isautier

Copp

Ayre

, et al. People's experiences and satisfaction with telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia: Cross-sectional survey study. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22: e24531.

12.

Ladin

Porteny

Perugini

, et al. Perceptions of telehealth vs in-person visits among older adults with advanced kidney disease, care partners, and clinicians. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4: e2137193.

13.

Turner

Clary

Hong

, et al. Patient portal barriers and group differences: Cross-sectional national survey study. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22: e18870.

14.

Fischer

Ray

Mehrotra

, et al. Prevalence and characteristics of telehealth utilization in the United States. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3: e2022302.

15.

Predmore

Roth

Breslau

, et al. Assessment of patient preferences for telehealth in post-COVID-19 pandemic health care. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4: e2136405.

16.

Bolton

Bevan-Smith

Blakey

, et al. British Thoracic society guideline on pulmonary rehabilitation in adults. Thorax 2013; 68: ii1–i30.

17.

Kaasgaard

Rasmussen

Andreasson

, et al. Use of Singing for Lung Health as an alternative training modality within pulmonary rehabilitation for COPD: a randomised controlled trial. Eur Respir J 2022; 59: 2101142.

18.

Loh

Leonhart

Wills

, et al. The impact of patient participation on adherence and clinical outcome in primary care of depression. Patient Educ Couns 2007; 65: 69–78.

19.

Carmona

Crutwell

Burnham

, et al. Shared decision-making: Summary of NICE guidance. Br Med J 2021; 373: n1430.

20.

Elwyn

Frosch

Thomson

, et al. Shared decision making: A model for clinical practice. J Gen Intern Med 2012; 27: 1361–1367.

21.

Manhas

Olson

Churchill

, et al. Experiences of shared decision-making in community rehabilitation: A focused ethnography. BMC Health Serv Res 2020; 20: 329.

22.

The International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration. What are Patient Decision Aids?. http://ipdas.ohri.ca/what.html (2017, accessed 5 October 2022).

23.

Stacey

Legare

Lewis

, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 4: CD001431.

24.

Jiang

Liu

Guo

, et al. Evaluating an intervention program using WeChat for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22: e17089.

25.

Chen

, et al. Characteristics of hearing loss in elderly outpatients over 60 years of age: An annual cross-sectional study. Acta Otolaryngol 2021; 141: 762–767.

26.

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. Global Strategy for Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of COPD: 2019 Report, https://goldcopd.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/GOLD-2019-v1.7-FINAL-14Nov2018-WMS.pdf (2018, accessed 5 October 2022).

27.

Dodd

Hogg

Nolan

, et al. The COPD assessment test (CAT): Response to pulmonary rehabilitation. A multicentre, prospective study. Thorax 2011; 66: 425–429.

28.

Cocks

Torgerson

. Sample size calculations for pilot randomized trials: A confidence interval approach. J Clin Epidemiol 2013; 66: 197–201.

29.

Whitehead

Julious

Cooper

, et al. Estimating the sample size for a pilot randomised trial to minimise the overall trial sample size for the external pilot and main trial for a continuous outcome variable. Stat Methods Med Res 2016; 25: 1057–1073.

30.

Jones

Brusselle

Dal Negro

, et al. Properties of the COPD assessment test in a cross-sectional European study. Eur Respir J 2011; 38: 29–35.

31.

American Thoracic Society. St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), https://www.thoracic.org/members/assemblies/assemblies/srn/questionaires/sgrq.php (2022, accessed 5 October 2022).

32.

Munari

Gulart

Dos Santos

, et al. Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale in GOLD classification better reflects physical activities of daily living. Respir Care 2018; 63: 77–85.

33.

Davis

Figueredo

Fahy

, et al. Reliability and validity of the Exercise Self-Regulatory Efficacy Scale for individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Heart Lung 2007; 36: 205–216.

34.

Maples

Franks

Ray

, et al. Development and validation of a low-literacy Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease knowledge Questionnaire (COPD-Q). Patient Educ Couns 2010; 81: 19–22.

35.

Shaojuan

Xiping

Hairong

, et al. Development and validation of questionnaire regarding knowledge, attitude, and practice of pulmonary rehabilitation for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Journal of Nursing Science 2020; 35: 69–71.

36.

Hersch

Barratt

Jansen

. Use of a decision aid including information on overdetection to support informed choice about breast cancer screening: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015; 385: 1622–1622.

37.

Subramanian

Zhao

Zee

, et al. Use of a decision aid for patients considering peritoneal dialysis and in-center hemodialysis: A randomized controlled trial. Am J Kidney Dis 2019; 74: 351–360.

38.

O'Connor

. Validation of a decisional conflict scale. Med Decis Making 1995; 15: 25–30.

39.

Brehaut

O'Connor

Wood

, et al. Validation of a Decision Regret Scale. Med Decis Making 2003; 23: 281–292.

40.

Dorsey

Topol

. Telemedicine 2020 and the next decade. Lancet 2020; 395: 859.

41.

Dechman

Aceron

Beauchamp

, et al. Delivering pulmonary rehabilitation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Canadian Thoracic Society Position Statement. Can J Resp Crit Care 2020; 4: 232–235.

42.

Matthys

. Shared decision making: An ideal and an art. Br Med J 2021; 374: n2033.

43.

Abrams

Shaker

Oppenheimer

, et al. The challenges and opportunities for shared decision making highlighted by COVID-19. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2020; 8: 2474–2480 e2471.

44.

Veroff

Marr

Wennberg

. Enhanced support for shared decision making reduced costs of care for patients with preference-sensitive conditions. Health Aff (Millwood) 2013; 32: 285–293.

45.

Trenaman

Selva

Desroches

, et al. A measurement framework for adherence in patient decision aid trials applied in a systematic review subanalysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 77: 15–23.

46.

Granados-Santiago

Valenza

Lopez-Lopez

, et al. Shared decision-making and patient engagement program during acute exacerbation of COPD hospitalization: A randomized control trial. Patient Educ Couns 2020; 103: 702–708.

47.

Elwyn

Durand

Song

, et al. A three-talk model for shared decision making: Multistage consultation process. Br Med J 2017; 359: j4891.

48.

Golin

DiMatteo

Gelberg

. The role of patient participation in the doctor visit. Implications for adherence to diabetes care. Diabetes Care 1996; 19: 1153–1164.

49.

Rhodes

Martin

Taunton

, et al. Factors associated with exercise adherence among older adults – an individual perspective. Sports Med 1999; 28: 397–411.

50.

Ancker

Grossman

Benda

. Health literacy 2030: Is it time to redefine the term? J Gen Intern Med 2020; 35: 2427–2430.

51.

Durand

Yen

O'Malley

, et al. What matters most: Randomized controlled trial of breast cancer surgery conversation aids across socioeconomic strata. Cancer 2021; 127: 422–436.

52.

Wang

Dong

, et al. The influence of value reference point and risk preference on adherence in hypertensive patients in a low-income area of China. Postgrad Med 2020; 132: 132–140.

53.

Rose

Rosewilliam

Soundy

. Shared decision making within goal setting in rehabilitation settings: A systematic review. Patient Educ Couns 2017; 100: 65–75.

54.

Smith

Volk

. Nonclinical factors affecting shared decision making. JAMA 2017; 318: 391.

55.

Mott

. Do preferences differ based on respondent experience of a health issue and its treatment? A case study using a public health intervention. Epub ahead of print 18 Jun 2022. DOI: 10.1007/s10198-022-01482-6.

56.

Stacey

Legare

Boland

, et al. 20th Anniversary Ottawa decision support framework: Part 3 overview of systematic reviews and updated framework. Med Decis Making 2020; 40: 379–398.

57.

Hoefel

O'Connor

Lewis

, et al. 20th Anniversary update of the Ottawa decision support framework part 1: A systematic review of the decisional needs of people making health or social decisions. Med Decis Making 2020; 40: 555–581.

58.

Allen

McIlvennan

Thompson

, et al. Effectiveness of an intervention supporting shared decision making for destination therapy left ventricular assist device: The DECIDE-LVAD randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 2018; 178: 520–529.

59.

Chen

Kang

Chiu

, et al. Effectiveness of shared decision-making intervention in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases: A randomized controlled trial. Patient Educ Couns 2021; 104: 2498–2504.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.22 MB

0.02 MB

0.09 MB

0.24 MB