Respiratory physician Lutz Beckert considers chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management, including the prevention of COPD, the importance of smoking cessation and pulmonary rehabilitation, and the lifesaving potential of addressing treatable traits. He also discusses the logic of inhaler therapy, moving from single therapy to dual and triple therapy when indicated, as well as other aspects of management
Decision aids beneficial for people facing health treatment or screening decisions
Vault Navigation
Decision aids beneficial for people facing health treatment or screening decisions
How effective are decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions?
Compared with usual care across a wide variety of decision contexts, people exposed to decision aids felt more knowledgeable (high-quality evidence), better informed (high-quality evidence) and clearer about their values. They probably had a more active role in decision making and more accurate risk perceptions (moderate-quality evidence). There were no adverse effects on health outcomes or satisfaction. There was improved knowledge and accurate risk perceptions when decision aids were used either within or in preparation for the consultation. Although knowledge scores and accurate risk perceptions were significantly higher in the decision-aid group compared with usual care, there was no difference in these outcomes when comparing decision aids used in preparation for, versus during, the consultation.
The median effect of decision aids on length of consultation was 2.6 minutes longer (24 versus 21; 7.5% increase). The costs of the decision-aid group were lower in 2 studies and similar to usual care in 4 studies.
Decision aids are interventions that support patients by making their decisions explicit, providing information about options and associated benefits/harms, and helping clarify congruence between decisions and personal values.
Stacey D et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Reviews, 2017, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD001431.DOI: 10.1002/14651858. CD001431.pub5. This review contains 105 studies involving 31,043 participants.