IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v27y2007i5p575-584.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effectiveness of a Computerized Decision Aid in Primary Care on Decision Making and Quality of Life in Menorrhagia: Results of the MENTIP Randomized Controlled Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Joanne Protheroe

    (National Primary Care Research and Development Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom, j.protheroe@manchester.ac.uk)

  • Peter Bower

    (National Primary Care Research and Development Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom)

  • Carolyn Chew-Graham

    (Rusholme Academic Unit, School of Community Based Medicine, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom)

  • Tim J. Peters

    (Academic Unit of Primary Health Care, Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom)

  • Tom Fahey

    (Division of Community Health Services, University of Dundee, Mackenzie Building, Dundee, United Kingdom)

Abstract

Background. Computerized decision aids have the potential to increase patient involvement in the decision-making process. However, most published evidence concerning the effectiveness of decision aids is from secondary care. Aim. To evaluate whether the addition of a computerized decision aid to written information improves decision making in women consulting their general practitioner with menorrhagia comparedwithwritten informationalone. Design of study. Randomized controlled trial. Setting. Nineteen general practices in the North of England. Method. One hundred forty-nine women presenting with menorrhagia were randomized to receive written information and access to a computerized decision aid or written information alone. Outcomes were assessed using postal questionnaires. These were scores on the Decisional Conflict Scale and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory anxiety scale at 2 weeks and the Menorrhagia Specific Utility quality-of-life scale, knowledge about menorrhagia, and anxiety and process measures at 6 months. Results. Two weeks after the intervention, there was significantly less decisional conflict in the intervention group (adjusted difference = −16.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] = −21.5 to −11.7; P

Suggested Citation

  • Joanne Protheroe & Peter Bower & Carolyn Chew-Graham & Tim J. Peters & Tom Fahey, 2007. "Effectiveness of a Computerized Decision Aid in Primary Care on Decision Making and Quality of Life in Menorrhagia: Results of the MENTIP Randomized Controlled Trial," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 27(5), pages 575-584, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:27:y:2007:i:5:p:575-584
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X07306785
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X07306785
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X07306785?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael Pignone, 2007. "Incorporating Decision Analysis in Decision Aids," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 27(5), pages 547-549, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:27:y:2007:i:5:p:575-584. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.