Efficacy of shared decision making in tobacco cessation among health facilities of Haryana, India – A double blinded, parallel group Randomized Controlled trial Protocol

IF 1.9 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Public Health in Practice Pub Date : 2024-12-22 DOI:10.1016/j.puhip.2024.100581
Pranav Kshtriya , Sonu Goel , Abhishek Ghosh
{"title":"Efficacy of shared decision making in tobacco cessation among health facilities of Haryana, India – A double blinded, parallel group Randomized Controlled trial Protocol","authors":"Pranav Kshtriya ,&nbsp;Sonu Goel ,&nbsp;Abhishek Ghosh","doi":"10.1016/j.puhip.2024.100581","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Shared decision-making (SDM) incorporates evidence, patient values, and preferences into medical decision-making. SDM and decision aids might promote health professional engagement and patient knowledge of tobacco cessation therapy, improving usage and results. The SDM facilitates talks that lead to better-informed judgements that align with patients' priorities, unlike individual decision-making. Thus, the study will attempt to identify the efficacy of shared decision making in tobacco dependence treatment.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>1) <strong>Design</strong>: a two-arm parallel group randomized controlled trial (RCT) 2) <strong>Setting:</strong> Three selected government health centers of Haryana, India. 3) <strong>Participants:</strong> 596 tobacco users aged ≥18 visiting the outpatient department/Tobacco cessation centers (TCC) of selected health centers. 4) <strong>Intervention and Comparator:</strong> The intervention group will receive shared decision process for prescribing pharmacotherapy (Nicotine replacement therapy, Bupropion) using specially designed decision aid based on three-talk model for tobacco cessation, while the control group will get standard care. 5) <strong>Measurements:</strong> Primary outcomes include urinary cotinine analysis for evaluating 7-day point prevalence abstinence. Secondary outcomes include patient satisfaction questionnaire PSQ-18 score, cumulative days of tobacco abstinence, self-reported number of quit attempts, and the rate of withdrawal. The outcomes such as change in behavior status i.e. tobacco cessation will be compared between the intervention and the comparator groups. When comparing the two groups, differences between proportions will be assessed by chi-square test, differences between means with <em>t</em>-test. An intention to treat analysis will be done when comparing outcomes in both arms.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>SDM in tobacco cessation therapies in healthcare settings is understudied, thereby this study looks at comparable interventions in different settings to add to the evidence. This suggests that this study on SDM in tobacco cessation therapy, which includes healthcare professionals, aims to assist patients in making evidence- and value-based medical decisions.</div></div><div><h3>Trial registration</h3><div>This protocol has been registered under the registration number CTRI/2022/10/046793 with the Clinical Trials Registry in India.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34141,"journal":{"name":"Public Health in Practice","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100581"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11742332/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666535224001186","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) incorporates evidence, patient values, and preferences into medical decision-making. SDM and decision aids might promote health professional engagement and patient knowledge of tobacco cessation therapy, improving usage and results. The SDM facilitates talks that lead to better-informed judgements that align with patients' priorities, unlike individual decision-making. Thus, the study will attempt to identify the efficacy of shared decision making in tobacco dependence treatment.

Methods

1) Design: a two-arm parallel group randomized controlled trial (RCT) 2) Setting: Three selected government health centers of Haryana, India. 3) Participants: 596 tobacco users aged ≥18 visiting the outpatient department/Tobacco cessation centers (TCC) of selected health centers. 4) Intervention and Comparator: The intervention group will receive shared decision process for prescribing pharmacotherapy (Nicotine replacement therapy, Bupropion) using specially designed decision aid based on three-talk model for tobacco cessation, while the control group will get standard care. 5) Measurements: Primary outcomes include urinary cotinine analysis for evaluating 7-day point prevalence abstinence. Secondary outcomes include patient satisfaction questionnaire PSQ-18 score, cumulative days of tobacco abstinence, self-reported number of quit attempts, and the rate of withdrawal. The outcomes such as change in behavior status i.e. tobacco cessation will be compared between the intervention and the comparator groups. When comparing the two groups, differences between proportions will be assessed by chi-square test, differences between means with t-test. An intention to treat analysis will be done when comparing outcomes in both arms.

Discussion

SDM in tobacco cessation therapies in healthcare settings is understudied, thereby this study looks at comparable interventions in different settings to add to the evidence. This suggests that this study on SDM in tobacco cessation therapy, which includes healthcare professionals, aims to assist patients in making evidence- and value-based medical decisions.

Trial registration

This protocol has been registered under the registration number CTRI/2022/10/046793 with the Clinical Trials Registry in India.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
印度哈里亚纳邦卫生机构在戒烟方面共同决策的有效性——一项双盲、平行组随机对照试验方案
背景:共享决策(SDM)将证据、患者价值观和偏好纳入医疗决策。SDM和决策辅助工具可以促进卫生专业人员的参与和患者对戒烟疗法的了解,从而改善使用和效果。与个人决策不同,SDM促进了与患者优先事项相一致的更明智的判断的对话。因此,本研究将试图确定共同决策在烟草依赖治疗中的功效。方法:1)设计:双组平行随机对照试验(RCT); 2)设置:选定印度哈里亚纳邦3个政府卫生中心;3)参与者:选定卫生中心门诊部/戒烟中心(TCC)就诊的596名年龄≥18岁的吸烟者。4)干预与比较:干预组采用专门设计的基于三语戒烟模型的决策辅助工具,共享药物治疗(尼古丁替代疗法、安非他酮)的处方决策过程,对照组采用标准治疗。5)测量:主要结果包括尿可替宁分析,用于评估7天点流行性戒断。次要结局包括患者满意度问卷PSQ-18评分、累计戒烟天数、自我报告的戒烟尝试次数和戒断率。将比较干预组和比较组之间的结果,如行为状态的改变,即戒烟。两组比较时,比例差异采用卡方检验,均数差异采用t检验。在比较两组的结果时,将进行意向治疗分析。讨论:SDM在医疗机构戒烟治疗中的研究不足,因此本研究着眼于不同环境下的可比干预措施,以增加证据。这表明,这项关于SDM在戒烟治疗中的研究,包括医疗保健专业人员,旨在帮助患者做出基于证据和价值的医疗决策。试验注册:本方案已在印度临床试验注册中心注册,注册号为CTRI/2022/10/046793。
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
Public Health in Practice
Public Health in Practice Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
117
审稿时长
71 days
期刊最新文献
How can integrated neighbourhood teams (INTs) tackle health and care inequalities? A policy evidence brief. Global patterns of communicable disease risk and prevention in migrant populations: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. A propensity score-matched study including 250,000 patients with Factor V Leiden shows significantly increased mortality in comparison with individuals without thrombophilia. Short and disrupted sleep is related to perceptions of neighborhood in pregnant African American women of low socioeconomic status. Evaluation of an innovative model for leadership and management development among national immunization program teams.
×
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:604180095
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