Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Use of digital patient decision-support tools for atrial fibrillation treatments: a systematic review and meta-analysis
8
Zitationen
15
Autoren
2024
Jahr
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of digital patient decision-support tools for atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment decisions in adults with AF. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated digital patient decision-support tools for AF treatment decisions in adults with AF. INFORMATION SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus from 2005 to 2023.Risk-of-bias (RoB) assessment: We assessed RoB using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 for RCTs and cluster RCT and the ROBINS-I tool for quasi-experimental studies. SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: We used random effects meta-analysis to synthesise decisional conflict and patient knowledge outcomes reported in RCTs. We performed narrative synthesis for all outcomes. The main outcomes of interest were decisional conflict and patient knowledge. RESULTS: =0%; low certainty evidence) favouring digital patient decision-support tools compared with usual care. Four of the 11 tools were publicly available and 3 had been implemented in healthcare delivery. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of stroke prevention in AF, digital patient decision-support tools likely reduce decisional conflict and may result in little to no change in patient knowledge, compared with usual care. Future studies should leverage digital capabilities for increased personalisation and interactivity of the tools, with better consideration of health literacy and equity aspects. Additional robust trials and implementation studies are warranted. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020218025.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions
2017 · 6.597 Zit.
Shared Decision Making: A Model for Clinical Practice
2012 · 4.171 Zit.
Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango)
1997 · 4.103 Zit.
Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: a review.
1995 · 4.076 Zit.
Shared Decision Making — The Pinnacle of Patient-Centered Care
2012 · 3.397 Zit.