A pilot randomized controlled trial of a decision aid with tailored fracture risk tool delivered via a patient portal
- 431 Downloads
We tested the feasibility of a fracture prevention decision aid in an online patient portal. The decision aid was acceptable for patients and successfully decreased decisional conflict. This study suggests the possible utility of leveraging the patient portal to enhance patient education and decision making in osteoporosis care.
Although interventions have improved osteoporosis screening and/or treatment for certain populations of high-risk patients, recent national studies suggest that large-scale uptake of these interventions has been limited. We aimed to determine the feasibility and potential efficacy of a patient portal-based osteoporosis decision aid (DA).
We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial of primary care patients aged ≥55 who were enrolled in a patient portal and had a T-score of <−1. Intervention subjects were provided a link to a patient DA. The DA contained a 10-year fracture risk calculator, summary of medication risks and benefits (prescription and nonprescription), and an elicitation of values. Subjects completed questionnaires assessing the primary outcomes of decisional conflict and preparation for decision making and secondary outcomes related to feasibility and planning for a larger trial. Charts were reviewed for physician-subject interactions and medication uptake.
The DA was acceptable to subjects, but 17 % of the patients in the decision aid arm incorrectly entered their T-scores into FRAX-based risk calculator. Decisional conflict was lower post-intervention for those who were randomized to the decision aid arm compared to controls (17.8 vs. 47.1, p < .001), and there was a significant difference in the percentage of patients who made a treatment decision at 3 months. No significant differences were observed in medication uptake.
A portal-based osteoporosis DA was acceptable and improved several measures of decision quality. Given its effect on improving the quality of patients’ decisions, future studies should examine whether it improves physician guideline adherence or medication adherence uptake among treated patients.
KeywordsDecision aids Osteoporosis Patient portal Personalized risk Shared decision making
A special thanks to Glenn Bushee for his invaluable assistance in the development of the decision aid and to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and staff at John M. Eisenberg Center for Clinical Decisions and Communications Science for making their decision aid publically available.
Compliance with ethical standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
This study was funded by the Clinical and Translational Science Institute of Southeast Wisconsin (project number 5,520,204).
Conflicts of interest
- 1.National Osteoporosis Foundation (2014) Clinician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. National Osteoporosis Foundation, Washington D.CGoogle Scholar
- 2.Watts NB, Bilezikian JP, Camacho PM, Greenspan SL, Harris ST, Hodgson SF, Kleerekoper M, Luckey MM, McClung MR, Pollack RP, Petak SM, Osteoporosis Task Force AACE (2010) American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists medical guidelines for clinical practice for the diagnosis and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Endocr Pract 16(Suppl 3):1–37. doi: 10.4158/EP.16.S3.1 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 13.Stacey D, Légaré F, Col NF, Bennett CL, Barry MJ, Eden KB, Holmes-Rovner M, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Lyddiatt A, Thomson R (2014) Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (1). doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub4
- 14.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (2012) Healthy bones: a decision aid for women after menopause. http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/ehc/decisionaids/osteoporosis/. Accessed: 2013
- 15.Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (2011) Osteoporosis: Should I have a dual x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) test? http://220.127.116.11/AZsumm.php?ID=1128. Accessed February 2013
- 17.Charts to download (2011) World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Metabolic Bone Diseases. http://www.shef.ac.uk/FRAX/charts.aspx. Accessed 2013
- 18.Elwyn G, O’Connor A, Stacey D, Volk R, Edwards A, Coulter A, Thomson R, Barratt A, Barry M, Bernstein S, Butow P, Clarke A, Entwistle V, Feldman-Stewart D, Holmes-Rovner M, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Moumjid N, Mulley A, Ruland C, Sepucha K, Sykes A, Whelan T (2006) Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process. Brit Med J 333(7565):417. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38926.629329.AE CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 19.Graham I, O’Connor A (1996) Preparation for decision making scale. http://decisionaid.ohri.ca/docs/develop/Tools/PrepDM.pdf. Accessed February 2013
- 20.O’Connor A (1993) User manual- decisional conflict scale. http://decisionaid.ohri.ca/docs/develop/User_Manuals/UM_Decisional_Conflict.pdf. Accessed February 2013
- 25.Montori VM, Shah ND, Pencille LJ, Branda ME, Van Houten HK, Swiglo BA, Kesman RL, Tulledge-Scheitel SM, Jaeger TM, Johnson RE, Bartel GA, Melton Iii LJ, Wermers RA (2011) Use of a decision aid to improve treatment decisions in osteoporosis: the osteoporosis choice randomized trial. Am J Med 124(6):549–556. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.01.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar