Skip to main content
PMC home page
Quality & Safety in Health Care logoLink to Quality & Safety in Health Care
. 2002 Mar;11(1):25–31. doi: 10.1136/qhc.11.1.25

Development and description of a decision analysis based decision support tool for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation

R Thomson 1, A Robinson 1, J Greenaway 1, P Lowe 1
PMCID: PMC1743557  PMID: 12078365

Abstract

Background: There is an increasing move towards clinical decision making that engages the patient, which has led to the development and use of decision aids to support better decisions. The treatment of patients in atrial fibrillation (AF) with warfarin to prevent stroke is a decision that is sensitive to patient preferences as shown by a previous decision analysis.

Aim: To develop a computerised decision support tool, building upon a previous decision analysis, which would engage individual patient preferences in reaching a shared decision on whether to take warfarin to prevent stroke.

Methods: The development process had two main phases: (1) the development phase which employed focus groups and repeated interviews with GPs/practice nurses and patients alongside an iterative development of a computerised tool; (2) the training and testing phase in which GPs and practice nurses underwent training in the use of the tool, including the use of simulated patients. The tool was then used in a feasibility study in a small number of patients with AF to inform the design of a subsequent randomised controlled trial.

Results: The prototype tool had three components: (1) derivation of an individual patient's values for relevant health states using a standard gamble; (2) presentation/discussion of a patient's risks of stroke using the Framingham equation and the benefits/risks of warfarin from a systematic literature review; and (3) decision making component incorporating the outcome of a Markov decision analysis model. Older patients could be taken through the decision analysis based computerised tool, and patients and clinicians welcomed information on risks and benefits of treatments. The tool required time and training to use. Patients' decisions in the feasibility phase did not necessarily coincide with the output of the decision analysis model, but decision conflict appeared to be reduced and both patients and GPs were satisfied with the process.

Conclusions: It is feasible to develop a decision analysis based computer software package that is acceptable to elderly patients and clinicians, but it requires time and expertise to use. It is most likely that a tool of this type will best be used by a small number of clinicians who have developed experience of its use and can maintain their skills.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (272.3 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Barry M. J., Fowler F. J., Jr, Mulley A. G., Jr, Henderson J. V., Jr, Wennberg J. E. Patient reactions to a program designed to facilitate patient participation in treatment decisions for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Med Care. 1995 Aug;33(8):771–782. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199508000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Clancy C. M., Cebul R. D., Williams S. V. Guiding individual decisions: a randomized, controlled trial of decision analysis. Am J Med. 1988 Feb;84(2):283–288. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(88)90426-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Coulter A., Entwistle V., Gilbert D. Sharing decisions with patients: is the information good enough? BMJ. 1999 Jan 30;318(7179):318–322. doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7179.318. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Entwistle V. A., Sowden A. J., Watt I. S. Evaluating interventions to promote patient involvement in decision-making: by what criteria should effectiveness be judged? J Health Serv Res Policy. 1998 Apr;3(2):100–107. doi: 10.1177/135581969800300208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Hart R. G., Benavente O., McBride R., Pearce L. A. Antithrombotic therapy to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 1999 Oct 5;131(7):492–501. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-131-7-199910050-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Holmes-Rovner M., Kroll J., Schmitt N., Rovner D. R., Breer M. L., Rothert M. L., Padonu G., Talarczyk G. Patient satisfaction with health care decisions: the satisfaction with decision scale. Med Decis Making. 1996 Jan-Mar;16(1):58–64. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9601600114. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Howe C. W. Umbilical cord blood for transplantation. JAMA. 1996 Mar 27;275(12):910–910. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Levine M. N., Gafni A., Markham B., MacFarlane D. A bedside decision instrument to elicit a patient's preference concerning adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Ann Intern Med. 1992 Jul 1;117(1):53–58. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-117-1-53. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Lilford R., Royston G. Decision analysis in the selection, design and application of clinical and health services research. J Health Serv Res Policy. 1998 Jul;3(3):159–166. doi: 10.1177/135581969800300307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Man-Son-Hing M., Laupacis A., O'Connor A. M., Biggs J., Drake E., Yetisir E., Hart R. G. A patient decision aid regarding antithrombotic therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 1999 Aug 25;282(8):737–743. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.8.737. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Murray E., Davis H., Tai S. S., Coulter A., Gray A., Haines A. Randomised controlled trial of an interactive multimedia decision aid on benign prostatic hypertrophy in primary care. BMJ. 2001 Sep 1;323(7311):493–496. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7311.493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Murray E., Davis H., Tai S. S., Coulter A., Gray A., Haines A. Randomised controlled trial of an interactive multimedia decision aid on hormone replacement therapy in primary care. BMJ. 2001 Sep 1;323(7311):490–493. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7311.490. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. O'Connor A. M., Rostom A., Fiset V., Tetroe J., Entwistle V., Llewellyn-Thomas H., Holmes-Rovner M., Barry M., Jones J. Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: systematic review. BMJ. 1999 Sep 18;319(7212):731–734. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7212.731. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. O'Connor A. M. Validation of a decisional conflict scale. Med Decis Making. 1995 Jan-Mar;15(1):25–30. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9501500105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Pell I., Dowie J., Clarke A., Kennedy A., Bhavnani V. Development and preliminary evaluation of a clinical guidance programme for the decision about prophylactic oophorectomy in women undergoing a hysterectomy. Qual Saf Health Care. 2002 Mar;11(1):32–39. doi: 10.1136/qhc.11.1.32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Plante D. A., Kassirer J. P., Zarin D. A., Pauker S. G. Clinical decision consultation service. Am J Med. 1986 Jun;80(6):1169–1176. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(86)90680-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Robinson A., Thomson R. G., Decision Analysis in Routine Treatments Study (DARTS) team The potential use of decision analysis to support shared decision making in the face of uncertainty: the example of atrial fibrillation and warfarin anticoagulation. Qual Health Care. 2000 Dec;9(4):238–244. doi: 10.1136/qhc.9.4.238. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Robinson A., Thomson R., Parkin D., Sudlow M., Eccles M. How patients with atrial fibrillation value different health outcomes: a standard gamble study. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2001 Apr;6(2):92–98. doi: 10.1258/1355819011927288. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Rodgers H., Sudlow M., Dobson R., Kenny R. A., Thomson R. G. Warfarin anticoagulation in primary care: a regional survey of present practice and clinicians' views. Br J Gen Pract. 1997 May;47(418):309–310. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Sawka Carol A., Goel Vivek, Mahut Catherine A., Taylor Glen A., Thiel Elaine C., O'Connor Annette M., Ackerman Ida, Burt Janet H., Gort Elaine H. Development of a patient decision aid for choice of surgical treatment for breast cancer. Health Expect. 1998 Jun;1(1):23–36. doi: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.1998.00003.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Sudlow M., Thomson R. Clinical guidelines: quantity without quality. Qual Health Care. 1997 Jun;6(2):60–61. doi: 10.1136/qshc.6.2.60. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Tavakoli M., Davies H. T., Thomson R. Aiding clinical decisions with decision analysis. Hosp Med. 1999 Jun;60(6):444–447. doi: 10.12968/hosp.1999.60.6.1139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Thomson R., Bowling A., Moss F. Engaging patients in decisions: a challenge to health care delivery and public health. Qual Health Care. 2001 Sep;10 (Suppl 1):i1–i1. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Thomson R., McElroy H., Sudlow M. Guidelines on anticoagulant treatment in atrial fibrillation in Great Britain: variation in content and implications for treatment. BMJ. 1998 Feb 14;316(7130):509–513. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7130.509. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Thomson R., Parkin D., Eccles M., Sudlow M., Robinson A. Decision analysis and guidelines for anticoagulant therapy to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Lancet. 2000 Mar 18;355(9208):956–962. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)90012-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Torrance G. W. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. J Health Econ. 1986 Mar;5(1):1–30. doi: 10.1016/0167-6296(86)90020-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Wolf P. A., D'Agostino R. B., Belanger A. J., Kannel W. B. Probability of stroke: a risk profile from the Framingham Study. Stroke. 1991 Mar;22(3):312–318. doi: 10.1161/01.str.22.3.312. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Quality & safety in health care are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES