Decision Aid Implementation among Left Ventricular Assist Device Programs Participating in the DECIDE-LVAD Stepped-Wedge Trial

Author:

Matlock Daniel D.123,McIlvennan Colleen K.4,Thompson Jocelyn S.3ORCID,Morris Megan A.3,Venechuk Grace3,Dunlay Shannon M.5,LaRue Shane J.6,Lewis Eldrin F.7,Patel Chetan B.8,Blue Laura8,Chaussee Erin L.3,Glasgow Russell E.3,Walsh Mary Norine9,Allen Larry A.43

Affiliation:

1. Veterans Affairs Eastern Colorado Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, Denver, CO, USA

2. Division of Geriatric Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA

3. Adult and Child Consortium for Health Outcomes Research and Delivery Science, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA

4. Division of Cardiology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA

5. Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

6. Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA

7. Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

8. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA

9. St. Vincent Heart Center, Division of Cardiology, Indianapolis, IN, USA

Abstract

Background. Despite demonstrated efficacy, patient decision aids (DAs) are rarely used in clinical practice in the absence of coverage mandates. Deciding whether to pursue a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a major, preference-sensitive decision—ideal for exploring implementation of a DA. Methods. We conducted a type II effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial at 6 LVAD programs using a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized design. Using the RE-AIM framework, we collected both quantitative and qualitative outcomes, including a checklist collected by study staff for each enrolled patient regarding DA use and interviews with LVAD program clinicians preintervention, 6 months postintervention, and at the conclusion of the study. Results. From June 2015 to January 2017, 248 patients and their caregivers were enrolled. A total of 69 interviews were conducted with 48 clinicians at 3 time points. The DA reached 95% of eligible patients. Adoption was 100%, as all sites approached agreed to participate in the trial. Interviews revealed several themes related to the implementation of the DA: clinicians had a strong desire to ensure patients were informed and embraced the DA. Despite this, they reported communication challenges among their team that impeded implementation. Five of the 6 sites have maintained use of the DA following the trial; 1 site reported concerns about decreased procedural volume with use of the DA as a reason for discontinuation. Conclusions. In this hybrid trial, a DA for patients considering LVADs and their caregivers demonstrated high reach. Adoption and implementation were facilitated by a strong desire to ensure that patients were well informed. Future dissemination research and practice should attend to concerns about procedure volume and coverage mandates and facilitate ongoing communication at sites using the DA.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3