Shared decision making in patients with low risk chest pain: prospective randomized pragmatic trial
- PMID: 27919865
- PMCID: PMC5152707
- DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i6165
Shared decision making in patients with low risk chest pain: prospective randomized pragmatic trial
Abstract
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of shared decision making with usual care in choice of admission for observation and further cardiac testing or for referral for outpatient evaluation in patients with possible acute coronary syndrome.
Design: Multicenter pragmatic parallel randomized controlled trial.
Setting: Six emergency departments in the United States.
Participants: 898 adults (aged >17 years) with a primary complaint of chest pain who were being considered for admission to an observation unit for cardiac testing (451 were allocated to the decision aid and 447 to usual care), and 361 emergency clinicians (emergency physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants) caring for patients with chest pain.
Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an electronic, web based system to shared decision making facilitated by a decision aid or to usual care. The primary outcome, selected by patient and caregiver advisers, was patient knowledge of their risk for acute coronary syndrome and options for care; secondary outcomes were involvement in the decision to be admitted, proportion of patients admitted for cardiac testing, and the 30 day rate of major adverse cardiac events.
Results: Compared with the usual care arm, patients in the decision aid arm had greater knowledge of their risk for acute coronary syndrome and options for care (questions correct: decision aid, 4.2 v usual care, 3.6; mean difference 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.86), were more involved in the decision (observing patient involvement scores: decision aid, 18.3 v usual care, 7.9; 10.3, 9.1 to 11.5), and less frequently decided with their clinician to be admitted for cardiac testing (decision aid, 37% v usual care, 52%; absolute difference 15%; P<0.001). There were no major adverse cardiac events due to the intervention.
Conclusions: Use of a decision aid in patients at low risk for acute coronary syndrome increased patient knowledge about their risk, increased engagement, and safely decreased the rate of admission to an observation unit for cardiac testing.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01969240.
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Conflict of interest statement
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: JEH has research funding from Alere, Trinity, Siemens, and Roche and has consulted for Janssen. DBD has research funding from Siemens and Roche and has consulted for Janssen. All other authors have no support from any organization for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
Figures
Comment in
-
Shared decision making in low risk chest pain: looking ahead.BMJ. 2017 Jan 23;356:j324. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j324. BMJ. 2017. PMID: 28115318 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
The chest pain choice decision aid: a randomized trial.Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2012 May;5(3):251-9. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.111.964791. Epub 2012 Apr 10. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2012. PMID: 22496116 Clinical Trial.
-
Effectiveness of the Chest Pain Choice decision aid in emergency department patients with low-risk chest pain: study protocol for a multicenter randomized trial.Trials. 2014 May 10;15:166. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-166. Trials. 2014. PMID: 24884807 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Impact of a Shared Decision Making Intervention on Health Care Utilization: A Secondary Analysis of the Chest Pain Choice Multicenter Randomized Trial.Acad Emerg Med. 2018 Mar;25(3):293-300. doi: 10.1111/acem.13355. Epub 2017 Dec 26. Acad Emerg Med. 2018. PMID: 29218817 Clinical Trial.
-
Testing a Decision Aid for Patients with Low-Risk Chest Pain in the Emergency Room – The Chest Pain Choice Trial [Internet].Washington (DC): Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI); 2018 Mar. Washington (DC): Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI); 2018 Mar. PMID: 37184186 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
An end-user's guide to the HEART score and pathway.Am J Emerg Med. 2017 Sep;35(9):1350-1355. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2017.03.047. Epub 2017 Mar 21. Am J Emerg Med. 2017. PMID: 28363616 Review.
Cited by
-
JACC: Advances Expert Panel Perspective: Shared Decision-Making in Multidisciplinary Team-Based Cardiovascular Care.JACC Adv. 2024 Jul 3;3(7):100981. doi: 10.1016/j.jacadv.2024.100981. eCollection 2024 Jul. JACC Adv. 2024. PMID: 39130036 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Interventions to Facilitate Shared Decision-Making Using Decision Aids with Coronary Heart Disease Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2023 Aug 25;24(8):246. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2408246. eCollection 2023 Aug. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2023. PMID: 39076712 Free PMC article.
-
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jan 29;1(1):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub6. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024. PMID: 38284415 Review.
-
Cardiovascular disease risk communication and prevention: a meta-analysis.Eur Heart J. 2024 Mar 27;45(12):998-1013. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae002. Eur Heart J. 2024. PMID: 38243824 Free PMC article.
-
Exploring the Acceptability of Behavioral Swallowing Interventions for Head and Neck Cancer Patients During Radiotherapy: A Qualitative Study of Patients' Experience.Dysphagia. 2024 Aug;39(4):593-607. doi: 10.1007/s00455-023-10640-8. Epub 2023 Nov 22. Dysphagia. 2024. PMID: 37991659 Clinical Trial.
References
-
- Niska R, Bhuiya F, Xu J. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2007 emergency department summary[published Online First: 2010/08/24] Natl Health Stat Report 2010;(26):1-31.pmid:20726217. - PubMed
-
- Goodacre S, Cross E, Arnold J, Angelini K, Capewell S, Nicholl J. The health care burden of acute chest pain[published Online First: 2005/01/20] Heart 2005;91:229-30. 10.1136/hrt.2003.027599. pmid:15657244. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Bhuiya FA, Pitts SR, McCaig LF. Emergency department visits for chest pain and abdominal pain: United States, 1999-2008[published Online First: 2010/09/22] NCHS Data Brief 2010;(43):1-8.pmid:20854746. - PubMed
-
- Graff LG, Chern CH, Radford M. Emergency physicians’ acute coronary syndrome testing threshold and diagnostic performance: acute coronary syndrome critical pathway with return visit feedback[published Online First: 2014/07/26] Crit Pathw Cardiol 2014;13:99-103. 10.1097/HPC.0000000000000021. pmid:25062393. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Than M, Herbert M, Flaws D, et al. What is an acceptable risk of major adverse cardiac event in chest pain patients soon after discharge from the Emergency Department?: a clinical survey[published Online First: 2012/10/23] Int J Cardiol 2013;166:752-4. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.09.171. pmid:23084108. - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical