The purpose of this study is to test the acceptability and feasibility of a "toolkit" of patient decision aids (PtDAs) for heart failure patients who are considering an ICD implant.
Specific Aim 1: Examine acceptability and feasibility of a toolkit of patient decision aids (PtDAs) for patients with heart failure referred for primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators using a randomized control trial design across three diverse health care systems (Kaiser Colorado, The University of Colorado, and The Denver Veterans Hospital). 1. Measure the acceptability of the decision aids 2. Explore feasibility by measuring patient participation rates and adherence to the study protocol across all three sites. 3. Conduct a preliminary assessment of outcomes by measuring changes in decision quality (knowledge and value concordance), quality of life, depressive symptoms, health status, and spiritual well-being. Specific Aim 2: Determine the relative value of the various tools in the toolkit through in-depth interviews from study participants and providers at each intervention site
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
15
Research assistants will provide patients with a toolkit of decision aids. Participants will have the option of using all of the decision aids or just some of the decision aids.
University of Colorado Hospital (UCH)
Aurora, Colorado, United States
Kaiser Permanente of Colorado
Denver, Colorado, United States
Denver VA Medical Center
Denver, Colorado, United States
Measure the acceptability and feasibility of the decision aids
Acceptability-measure decision aid acceptability using modified version of decision aid acceptability developed by Barry et al. Feasibility-explore participation rates and adherence to study protocol; weekly team meetings to discuss recruitment strategies Knowledge: 21 item knowledge measure developed in-house Decision Conflict: validated 15-item decision conflict measure developed by O'Connor et al. Decision Regret: validated 5-item decision regret scale Decision choice: ultimate choice patient made about getting an ICD Decision participation: Prior to intervention, we measure patients' preferred role in decision making using the control preferences scale. After the decision, we measure the participants' actual role in decision making. Anxiety and Depression: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Chart Review Outcome: For those that had not yet had a procedure, we will review the charts at the end of study to determine if they received an ICD or not.
Time frame: pre-ICD discussion - baseline
Determine relative value of the four decision aids
Determine the relative value of the various tools in the toolkit through in-depth interviews from study participants and providers at each intervention site. We will ask participants the following questions: * Have you made a decision about getting or not getting the ICD? * What information did you use to make your decision? * How are you feeling about your decision? * What else would have been helpful in making your decision? * (Intervention only) Did you use any of the decision aids you were given? * If yes, please tell us how you used them? Did the decision aids make you feel better or worse about your decision? Did you like one of them better than the others? Is there any aspect that wasn't helpful? * If no, please tell us why not? What would have been helpful? * Do you have any advice on the best way to deliver these decision aids to future patients?
Time frame: 3 months after baseline interview
Measure the acceptability and feasibility of the decision aids
Acceptability-measure decision aid acceptability using modified version of decision aid acceptability developed by Barry et al. Feasibility-explore participation rates and adherence to study protocol; weekly team meetings to discuss recruitment strategies Knowledge: 21 item knowledge measure developed in-house Decision Conflict: validated 15-item decision conflict measure developed by O'Connor et al. Decision Regret: validated 5-item decision regret scale Decision choice: ultimate choice patient made about getting an ICD Decision participation: Prior to intervention, we measure patients' preferred role in decision making using the control preferences scale. After the decision, we measure the participants' actual role in decision making. Anxiety and Depression: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Chart Review Outcome: For those that had not yet had a procedure, we will review the charts at the end of study to determine if they received an ICD or not.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Time frame: within 4 weeks of meeting with electrophysiologist
Measure the acceptability and feasibility of the decision aids
Acceptability-measure decision aid acceptability using modified version of decision aid acceptability developed by Barry et al. Feasibility-explore participation rates and adherence to study protocol; weekly team meetings to discuss recruitment strategies Knowledge: 21 item knowledge measure developed in-house Decision Conflict: validated 15-item decision conflict measure developed by O'Connor et al. Decision Regret: validated 5-item decision regret scale Decision choice: ultimate choice patient made about getting an ICD Decision participation: Prior to intervention, we measure patients' preferred role in decision making using the control preferences scale. After the decision, we measure the participants' actual role in decision making. Anxiety and Depression: Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Chart Review Outcome: For those that had not yet had a procedure, we will review the charts at the end of study to determine if they received an ICD or not.
Time frame: 3 months after baseline interview