Evaluation of a Digital Decision Aid for Knee Replacement Surgery—A Stepped-Wedge, Cluster-Randomized Trial.

IF 6.5 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Deutsches Arzteblatt international Pub Date : 2024-08-23 DOI:10.3238/arztebl.m2024.0152
Jörg Lützner, Stefanie Deckert, Franziska Beyer, Waldemar Hahn, Jürgen Malzahn, Martin Sedlmayr, Klaus-Peter Günther, Jochen Schmitt, Toni Lange
{"title":"Evaluation of a Digital Decision Aid for Knee Replacement Surgery—A Stepped-Wedge, Cluster-Randomized Trial.","authors":"Jörg Lützner, Stefanie Deckert, Franziska Beyer, Waldemar Hahn, Jürgen Malzahn, Martin Sedlmayr, Klaus-Peter Günther, Jochen Schmitt, Toni Lange","doi":"10.3238/arztebl.m2024.0152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We studied whether an individualized digital decision aid can improve decision-making quality for or against knee arthroplasty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An app-based decision aid (EKIT tool) was developed and studied in a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial. Consecutive patients with knee osteoarthritis who were candidates for knee replacement were included in 10 centers in Germany. All subjects were asked via app on a tablet about their symptoms, prior treatments, and preferences and goals for treatment. For the subjects in the intervention group, the EKIT tool was used in the doctor-patient discussion to visualize the individual disease burden and degree of fulfillment of the indication criteria, and structured information on knee arthroplasty was provided. In the control group, the discussion was conducted without the EKIT tool in accordance with the local standard in each participating center. The primary endpoint was the quality of the patient's decision on the basis of the discussion of indications, as measured with the Hip and Knee Quality Decision Instrument (HK-DQI). (Registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT04837053).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1092 patients were included, and data from 1055 patients were analyzed (616 in the intervention group and 439 in the control group). Good decision quality, as rated by the HK-DQI, was achieved by 86.0% of patients in the intervention group and 67.4% of patients in the control group (relative risk, 1.24; 95 % confidence interval, [1.15; 1.33]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A digital decision aid significantly improved the quality of decision-making for or against knee replacement surgery. The widespread use of this instrument may have an even larger effect, as this trial was conducted mainly in hospitals with high case numbers.</p>","PeriodicalId":11258,"journal":{"name":"Deutsches Arzteblatt international","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Deutsches Arzteblatt international","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.m2024.0152","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: We studied whether an individualized digital decision aid can improve decision-making quality for or against knee arthroplasty.

Methods: An app-based decision aid (EKIT tool) was developed and studied in a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial. Consecutive patients with knee osteoarthritis who were candidates for knee replacement were included in 10 centers in Germany. All subjects were asked via app on a tablet about their symptoms, prior treatments, and preferences and goals for treatment. For the subjects in the intervention group, the EKIT tool was used in the doctor-patient discussion to visualize the individual disease burden and degree of fulfillment of the indication criteria, and structured information on knee arthroplasty was provided. In the control group, the discussion was conducted without the EKIT tool in accordance with the local standard in each participating center. The primary endpoint was the quality of the patient's decision on the basis of the discussion of indications, as measured with the Hip and Knee Quality Decision Instrument (HK-DQI). (Registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT04837053).

Results: 1092 patients were included, and data from 1055 patients were analyzed (616 in the intervention group and 439 in the control group). Good decision quality, as rated by the HK-DQI, was achieved by 86.0% of patients in the intervention group and 67.4% of patients in the control group (relative risk, 1.24; 95 % confidence interval, [1.15; 1.33]).

Conclusion: A digital decision aid significantly improved the quality of decision-making for or against knee replacement surgery. The widespread use of this instrument may have an even larger effect, as this trial was conducted mainly in hospitals with high case numbers.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估膝关节置换手术的数字决策辅助工具:阶梯式楔形分组随机试验
背景:我们研究了个性化数字决策辅助工具能否提高膝关节置换术的决策质量:我们研究了个性化数字决策辅助工具能否提高支持或反对膝关节置换术的决策质量:我们开发了一款基于应用程序的辅助决策工具(EKIT 工具),并在一项阶梯式、分组随机试验中进行了研究。德国 10 个中心连续纳入了膝关节骨性关节炎患者,他们都是膝关节置换术的候选者。所有受试者都通过平板电脑上的应用程序了解了他们的症状、之前的治疗方法、治疗偏好和目标。对于干预组的受试者,在医患讨论中使用 EKIT 工具来直观了解个人的疾病负担和符合适应症标准的程度,并提供有关膝关节置换术的结构化信息。在对照组中,讨论不使用 EKIT 工具,按照各参与中心的当地标准进行。主要终点是患者根据适应症讨论做出决定的质量,采用髋关节和膝关节质量决策工具(HK-DQI)进行测量。(注册号:ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT04837053):结果:共纳入 1092 例患者,分析了 1055 例患者的数据(干预组 616 例,对照组 439 例)。干预组中86.0%的患者和对照组中67.4%的患者(相对风险为1.24;95%置信区间为[1.15;1.33])通过HK-DQI评定达到了良好的决策质量:结论:数字决策辅助工具大大提高了是否进行膝关节置换手术的决策质量。由于该试验主要在病例数较多的医院进行,因此广泛使用该工具可能会产生更大的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Deutsches Arzteblatt international
Deutsches Arzteblatt international 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.20%
发文量
306
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Deutsches Ärzteblatt International is a bilingual (German and English) weekly online journal that focuses on clinical medicine and public health. It serves as the official publication for both the German Medical Association and the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians. The journal is dedicated to publishing independent, peer-reviewed articles that cover a wide range of clinical medicine disciplines. It also features editorials and a dedicated section for scientific discussion, known as correspondence. The journal aims to provide valuable medical information to its international readership and offers insights into the German medical landscape. Since its launch in January 2008, Deutsches Ärzteblatt International has been recognized and included in several prestigious databases, which helps to ensure its content is accessible and credible to the global medical community. These databases include: Carelit CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) Compendex DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals) EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database) EMNursing GEOBASE (Geoscience & Environmental Data) HINARI (Health InterNetwork Access to Research Initiative) Index Copernicus Medline (MEDLARS Online) Medpilot PsycINFO (Psychological Information Database) Science Citation Index Expanded Scopus By being indexed in these databases, Deutsches Ärzteblatt International's articles are made available to researchers, clinicians, and healthcare professionals worldwide, contributing to the global exchange of medical knowledge and research.
期刊最新文献
Dengue Fever—Diagnosis, Risk Stratification, and Treatment. Incidental Pulmonary Nodules: Differential Diagnosis and Clinical Management. Interrupted Time Series for Assessing the Causality of Intervention Effects. Part 35 of a Series on Evaluating Scientific Publications. The Incidence and Risk Factors of Persistent Opioid Use After Surgery—a Retrospective Secondary Data Analysis. One Question, Many Results—Why Epidemiological Studies Yield Heterogeneous Findings. Part 34 of a Series on Evaluation of Scientific Publications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1