Author:
Daudelin Denise H.,Ruthazer Robin,Kwong Manlik,Lorenzana Rebecca C.,Hannon Daniel J.,Kent David M.,McAlindon Timothy E.,Terrin Norma,Wong John B.,Selker Harry P.
Abstract
AbstractIntroduction:Shared patient–clinician decision-making is central to choosing between medical treatments. Decision support tools can have an important role to play in these decisions. We developed a decision support tool for deciding between nonsurgical treatment and surgical total knee replacement for patients with severe knee osteoarthritis. The tool aims to provide likely outcomes of alternative treatments based on predictive models using patient-specific characteristics. To make those models relevant to patients with knee osteoarthritis and their clinicians, we involved patients, family members, patient advocates, clinicians, and researchers as stakeholders in creating the models.Methods:Stakeholders were recruited through local arthritis research, advocacy, and clinical organizations. After being provided with brief methodological education sessions, stakeholder views were solicited through quarterly patient or clinician stakeholder panel meetings and incorporated into all aspects of the project.Results:Participating in each aspect of the research from determining the outcomes of interest to providing input on the design of the user interface displaying outcome predications, 86% (12/14) of stakeholders remained engaged throughout the project. Stakeholder engagement ensured that the prediction models that form the basis of the Knee Osteoarthritis Mathematical Equipoise Tool and its user interface were relevant for patient–clinician shared decision-making.Conclusions:Methodological research has the opportunity to benefit from stakeholder engagement by ensuring that the perspectives of those most impacted by the results are involved in study design and conduct. While additional planning and investments in maintaining stakeholder knowledge and trust may be needed, they are offset by the valuable insights gained.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference25 articles.
1. Patient and clinician views on comparative effectiveness research and engagement in research
2. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey
3. 20. SF-12 Health Survey. [Internet] [cited Feb 22, 2017]. (http://www.outcomes-trust.org/instruments.htm#SF-12)
4. 19. N B. WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index. [Internet] [cited Feb 22, 2017]. (http://www.womac.org/womac/index.htm)
5. 18. Nielsen, J. Thinking aloud: The #1 usability tool [Internet], 2012 [cited Nov 15, 2019]. (https://www.nngroup.com/articles/thinking-aloud-the-1-usability-tool/)
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献