Healthcare Options for People Experiencing Depression (HOPE∗D): The development and pilot testing of an encounter-based decision aid for use in primary care

Paul J. Barr, Rachel C. Forcino, Michelle D. Dannenberg, Manish Mishra, Erick Turner, Yaara Zisman-Ilani, Jim Matthews, Michelle Hinn, Martha Bruce, Glyn Elwyn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective To develop and pilot an encounter-based decision aid (eDA) for people with depression for use in primary care. Design We developed an eDA for depression through cognitive interviews and pilot tested it using a one-group pretest, post-Test design in primary care. Feasibility, fidelity of eDA use and acceptability were assessed using recruitment rates and semistructured interviews with patients, medical assistants and clinicians. Treatment choice and shared decision-making (SDM) were also assessed. Setting Interviews with adult patients and the public were conducted in a mall and library in Grafton County, New Hampshire, while clinician interviews took place by phone or at the clinician's office. Pilot testing occurred in a New Hampshire primary care practice. Participants Cognitive interviews were conducted with adults, ≥18 years, who could read English from the following stakeholder groups: history of depression, the public and clinicians. Patients with a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score of ≥5 were recruited for piloting. Results Three stages of cognitive interviews were conducted (n=28). Changes to eDA included moving the combination therapy information and access to treatment information, adding colour, modifying pictograms and editing the talk-Therapy description. Clinician concerns about patient health literacy were not reflected in patient interviews. Of 59 patients who reviewed study information, 56 were eligible and agreed to participate in pilot testing; however, only 29 could be reached for follow-up. The eDA was widely accepted, though clinicians did not always use it as intended. We found no impact of eDA use on SDM, though patients chose a wider range of treatment options. Conclusions We demonstrated the feasibility of the use of an eDA for depression in primary care that was widely accepted. Further research is needed to improve the fidelity with which the eDA is used and to assess its impact on SDM and related health outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere025375
JournalBMJ open
Volume9
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2019

Fingerprint

Decision Support Techniques
Primary Health Care
Depression
Delivery of Health Care
Interviews
Decision Making
Health Literacy
Therapeutics
Access to Information
Health
Libraries
Color
Research

Keywords

  • decision aid
  • decision support
  • depression
  • mental health care
  • primary care
  • shared decision-making

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Healthcare Options for People Experiencing Depression (HOPE∗D) : The development and pilot testing of an encounter-based decision aid for use in primary care. / Barr, Paul J.; Forcino, Rachel C.; Dannenberg, Michelle D.; Mishra, Manish; Turner, Erick; Zisman-Ilani, Yaara; Matthews, Jim; Hinn, Michelle; Bruce, Martha; Elwyn, Glyn.

In: BMJ open, Vol. 9, No. 4, e025375, 01.04.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Barr, Paul J. ; Forcino, Rachel C. ; Dannenberg, Michelle D. ; Mishra, Manish ; Turner, Erick ; Zisman-Ilani, Yaara ; Matthews, Jim ; Hinn, Michelle ; Bruce, Martha ; Elwyn, Glyn. / Healthcare Options for People Experiencing Depression (HOPE∗D) : The development and pilot testing of an encounter-based decision aid for use in primary care. In: BMJ open. 2019 ; Vol. 9, No. 4.
@article{d470740764cf4068a5451782b49ee4a9,
title = "Healthcare Options for People Experiencing Depression (HOPE∗D): The development and pilot testing of an encounter-based decision aid for use in primary care",
abstract = "Objective To develop and pilot an encounter-based decision aid (eDA) for people with depression for use in primary care. Design We developed an eDA for depression through cognitive interviews and pilot tested it using a one-group pretest, post-Test design in primary care. Feasibility, fidelity of eDA use and acceptability were assessed using recruitment rates and semistructured interviews with patients, medical assistants and clinicians. Treatment choice and shared decision-making (SDM) were also assessed. Setting Interviews with adult patients and the public were conducted in a mall and library in Grafton County, New Hampshire, while clinician interviews took place by phone or at the clinician's office. Pilot testing occurred in a New Hampshire primary care practice. Participants Cognitive interviews were conducted with adults, ≥18 years, who could read English from the following stakeholder groups: history of depression, the public and clinicians. Patients with a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score of ≥5 were recruited for piloting. Results Three stages of cognitive interviews were conducted (n=28). Changes to eDA included moving the combination therapy information and access to treatment information, adding colour, modifying pictograms and editing the talk-Therapy description. Clinician concerns about patient health literacy were not reflected in patient interviews. Of 59 patients who reviewed study information, 56 were eligible and agreed to participate in pilot testing; however, only 29 could be reached for follow-up. The eDA was widely accepted, though clinicians did not always use it as intended. We found no impact of eDA use on SDM, though patients chose a wider range of treatment options. Conclusions We demonstrated the feasibility of the use of an eDA for depression in primary care that was widely accepted. Further research is needed to improve the fidelity with which the eDA is used and to assess its impact on SDM and related health outcomes.",
keywords = "decision aid, decision support, depression, mental health care, primary care, shared decision-making",
author = "Barr, {Paul J.} and Forcino, {Rachel C.} and Dannenberg, {Michelle D.} and Manish Mishra and Erick Turner and Yaara Zisman-Ilani and Jim Matthews and Michelle Hinn and Martha Bruce and Glyn Elwyn",
year = "2019",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025375",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
journal = "BMJ Open",
issn = "2044-6055",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Healthcare Options for People Experiencing Depression (HOPE∗D)

T2 - The development and pilot testing of an encounter-based decision aid for use in primary care

AU - Barr, Paul J.

AU - Forcino, Rachel C.

AU - Dannenberg, Michelle D.

AU - Mishra, Manish

AU - Turner, Erick

AU - Zisman-Ilani, Yaara

AU - Matthews, Jim

AU - Hinn, Michelle

AU - Bruce, Martha

AU - Elwyn, Glyn

PY - 2019/4/1

Y1 - 2019/4/1

N2 - Objective To develop and pilot an encounter-based decision aid (eDA) for people with depression for use in primary care. Design We developed an eDA for depression through cognitive interviews and pilot tested it using a one-group pretest, post-Test design in primary care. Feasibility, fidelity of eDA use and acceptability were assessed using recruitment rates and semistructured interviews with patients, medical assistants and clinicians. Treatment choice and shared decision-making (SDM) were also assessed. Setting Interviews with adult patients and the public were conducted in a mall and library in Grafton County, New Hampshire, while clinician interviews took place by phone or at the clinician's office. Pilot testing occurred in a New Hampshire primary care practice. Participants Cognitive interviews were conducted with adults, ≥18 years, who could read English from the following stakeholder groups: history of depression, the public and clinicians. Patients with a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score of ≥5 were recruited for piloting. Results Three stages of cognitive interviews were conducted (n=28). Changes to eDA included moving the combination therapy information and access to treatment information, adding colour, modifying pictograms and editing the talk-Therapy description. Clinician concerns about patient health literacy were not reflected in patient interviews. Of 59 patients who reviewed study information, 56 were eligible and agreed to participate in pilot testing; however, only 29 could be reached for follow-up. The eDA was widely accepted, though clinicians did not always use it as intended. We found no impact of eDA use on SDM, though patients chose a wider range of treatment options. Conclusions We demonstrated the feasibility of the use of an eDA for depression in primary care that was widely accepted. Further research is needed to improve the fidelity with which the eDA is used and to assess its impact on SDM and related health outcomes.

AB - Objective To develop and pilot an encounter-based decision aid (eDA) for people with depression for use in primary care. Design We developed an eDA for depression through cognitive interviews and pilot tested it using a one-group pretest, post-Test design in primary care. Feasibility, fidelity of eDA use and acceptability were assessed using recruitment rates and semistructured interviews with patients, medical assistants and clinicians. Treatment choice and shared decision-making (SDM) were also assessed. Setting Interviews with adult patients and the public were conducted in a mall and library in Grafton County, New Hampshire, while clinician interviews took place by phone or at the clinician's office. Pilot testing occurred in a New Hampshire primary care practice. Participants Cognitive interviews were conducted with adults, ≥18 years, who could read English from the following stakeholder groups: history of depression, the public and clinicians. Patients with a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score of ≥5 were recruited for piloting. Results Three stages of cognitive interviews were conducted (n=28). Changes to eDA included moving the combination therapy information and access to treatment information, adding colour, modifying pictograms and editing the talk-Therapy description. Clinician concerns about patient health literacy were not reflected in patient interviews. Of 59 patients who reviewed study information, 56 were eligible and agreed to participate in pilot testing; however, only 29 could be reached for follow-up. The eDA was widely accepted, though clinicians did not always use it as intended. We found no impact of eDA use on SDM, though patients chose a wider range of treatment options. Conclusions We demonstrated the feasibility of the use of an eDA for depression in primary care that was widely accepted. Further research is needed to improve the fidelity with which the eDA is used and to assess its impact on SDM and related health outcomes.

KW - decision aid

KW - decision support

KW - depression

KW - mental health care

KW - primary care

KW - shared decision-making

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064392865&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85064392865&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025375

DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025375

M3 - Article

C2 - 30962232

AN - SCOPUS:85064392865

VL - 9

JO - BMJ Open

JF - BMJ Open

SN - 2044-6055

IS - 4

M1 - e025375

ER -