Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Primary Care
Published in: BMC Primary Care 1/2010

Open Access 01-12-2010 | Study protocol

The RISAP-study: a complex intervention in risk communication and shared decision-making in general practice

Authors: Pia Kirkegaard, Adrian GK Edwards, Bo Hansen, Mette D Hansen, Morten SA Jensen, Torsten Lauritzen, Mette B Risoer, Janus L Thomsen

Published in: BMC Primary Care | Issue 1/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

General practitioners (GPs) and patients find it difficult to talk about risk of future disease, especially when patients have asymptomatic conditions, and treatment options are unlikely to cause immediate perceptible improvements in well-being. Further studies in risk communication training are needed. Aim:1) to systematically develop, describe and evaluate a complex intervention comprising a training programme for GPs in risk communication and shared decision-making, 2) to evaluate the effect of the training programme on real-life consultations between GPs and patients with high cholesterol levels, and 3) to evaluate patients' reactions during and after the consultations.

Methods/Design

The effect of the complex intervention, based around a training programme, will be evaluated in a cluster-randomised controlled trial with an intervention group and an active control group with 40 GPs and 280 patients in each group.
The GPs will receive a questionnaire at baseline and after 6 months about attitudes towards risk communication and cholesterol-reducing medication. After each consultation with a participating high cholesterol-patient, the GPs will complete a questionnaire about decision satisfaction (Provider Decision Process Assessment Instrument). The patients will receive a questionnaire at baseline and after 3 and 6 months. It includes questions about adherence to chosen treatment (Morisky Compliance Scale), self-rated health (SF-12), enablement (Patient Enablement Instrument), and risk communication and decision-making effectiveness (COMRADE Scale). Prescriptions, contacts to the health services, and cholesterol level will be drawn from the registers.
In each group, 12 consultations will be observed and tape-recorded. The patients from these 24 consultations will be interviewed immediately after the consultation and re-interviewed after 6 months.
Eight purposefully selected GPs from the intervention group will be interviewed in a focus group 6 months after participation in the training programme.
The process and context of the RISAP-study will be investigated in detail using an action research approach, in order to analyse adaptation of the intervention model to the specific context.

Discussion

This study aims at providing GPs and patients with a firm basis for active deliberation about preventive treatment options, with a view to optimising adherence to chosen treatment.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration System NCT01187056
Literature
1.
Legare F, O'Connor AC, Graham I, Saucier D, Cote L, Cauchon M, et al: Supporting patients facing difficult health care decisions: use of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. Can Fam Physician. 2006, 52: 476-477.PubMedPubMedCentral
2.
O'Connor AM, Bennett CL, Stacey D, Barry M, Col NF, Eden KB, et al: Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009, 3 (3): CD001431-PubMed
3.
Edwards A, Gray J, Clarke A, Dundon J, Elwyn G, Gaff C, et al: Interventions to improve risk communication in clinical genetics: systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2008, 71 (1): 4-25. 10.1016/j.pec.2007.11.026.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Daskalopoulou SS, Doonan RJ, Mikhailidis DP: Undertreatment of hypercholesterolemia. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010, 26 (2): 439-443. 10.1185/03007990903512396.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Graversen L, Christensen B, Borch-Johnsen K, Lauritzen T, Sandbaek A: General practitioners' adherence to guidelines on management of dyslipidaemia: ADDITION-Denmark. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2009, 28 (1): 47-54. 10.3109/02813430903335216.CrossRef
6.
van der Weijden T, Bos LB, Koelewijn-van Loon MS: Primary care patients' recognition of their own risk for cardiovascular disease: implications for risk communication in practice. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2008, 23 (5): 471-476. 10.1097/HCO.0b013e32830b35f6.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Narla V, Blaha MJ, Blumenthal RS, Michos ED: The JUPITER and AURORA clinical trials for rosuvastatin in special primary prevention populations: perspectives, outcomes, and consequences. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2009, 5: 1033-1042.PubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Baigent C, Keech A, Kearney PM, Blackwell L, Buck G, Pollicino C, et al: Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from 90,056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins. Lancet. 2005, 366 (9493): 1267-1278. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67394-1.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Hermans MP, Castro Cabezas M, Strandberg T, Ferrieres J, Feely J, Elisaf M, et al: Centralized Pan-European survey on the under-treatment of hypercholesterolaemia (CEPHEUS): overall findings from eight countries. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010, 26 (2): 445-454. 10.1185/03007990903500565.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Schedlbauer A, Schroeder K, Fahey T: How can adherence to lipid-lowering medication be improved? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Fam Pract. 2007, 24 (4): 380-387. 10.1093/fampra/cmm030.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Chaudhry HJ, McDermott B: Recognizing and improving patient nonadherence to statin therapy. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2008, 10 (1): 19-24. 10.1007/s11883-008-0004-4.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Frishman WH: Importance of medication adherence in cardiovascular disease and the value of once-daily treatment regimens. Cardiol Rev. 2007, 15 (5): 257-263. 10.1097/CRD.0b013e3180cabbe7.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Huser MA, Evans TS, Berger V: Medication adherence trends with statins. Adv Ther. 2005, 22 (2): 163-171. 10.1007/BF02849887.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Munger MA, Van Tassell BW, LaFleur J: Medication nonadherence: an unrecognized cardiovascular risk factor. MedGenMed. 2007, 9 (3): 58-PubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Casebeer L, Huber C, Bennett N, Shillman R, Abdolrasulnia M, Salinas GD, et al: Improving the physician-patient cardiovascular risk dialogue to improve statin adherence. BMC Fam Pract. 2009, 10:48-
16.
Doroodchi H, Abdolrasulnia M, Foster JA, Foster E, Turakhia MP, Skelding KA, et al: Knowledge and attitudes of primary care physicians in the management of patients at risk for cardiovascular events. BMC Fam Pract. 2008, 9:42-
17.
Edwards A, Elwyn G: Involving patients in decision making and communicating risk: a longitudinal evaluation of doctors' attitudes and confidence during a randomized trial. J Eval Clin Pract. 2004, 10 (3): 431-437. 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2004.00502.x.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Reventlow S, Hvas AC, Tulinius C: "In really great danger..." The concept of risk in general practice. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2001, 19 (2): 71-75. 10.1080/028134301750235268.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Tulloch J, Lupton D: Risk and Everyday Life. 2003, London: SAGE Publications
20.
Wheatley EE: Bodies at Risk: An Ethnography of Heart Disease. 2006, England: Ashgate
21.
22.
Elwyn G, Edwards A, Kinnersley P, Grol R: Shared decision making and the concept of equipoise: the competences of involving patients in healthcare choices. Br J Gen Pract. 2000, 50 (460): 892-899.PubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Edwards A, Elwyn G, Hood K, Atwell C, Robling M, Houston H, et al: Patient-based outcome results from a cluster randomized trial of shared decision making skill development and use of risk communication aids in general practice. Fam Pract. 2004, 21 (4): 347-354. 10.1093/fampra/cmh402.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Elwyn G, Edwards A, Hood K, Robling M, Atwell C, Russell I, et al: Achieving involvement: process outcomes from a cluster randomized trial of shared decision making skill development and use of risk communication aids in general practice. Fam Pract. 2004, 21 (4): 337-346. 10.1093/fampra/cmh401.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Elwyn G, O'Connor AM, Bennett C, Newcombe RG, Politi M, Durand MA, et al: Assessing the quality of decision support technologies using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument (IPDASi). PLoS One. 2009, 4 (3): e4705-10.1371/journal.pone.0004705.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Towle A, Bainbridge L, Godolphin W, Katz A, Kline C, Lown B, et al: Active patient involvement in the education of health professionals. Med Educ. 2010, 44 (1): 64-74. 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03530.x.CrossRefPubMed
27.
28.
van Steenkiste B, Grol R, van der Weijden T: Systematic review of implementation strategies for risk tables in the prevention of cardiovascular diseases. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2008, 4 (3): 535-545.PubMedPubMedCentral
29.
Glasziou P, Meats E, Heneghan C, Shepperd S: What is missing from descriptions of treatment in trials and reviews?. BMJ. 2008, 336 (7659): 1472-1474. 10.1136/bmj.39590.732037.47.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Bieber C, Nicolai J, Hartmann M, Blumenstiel K, Ringel N, Schneider A, et al: Training physicians in shared decision-making-who can be reached and what is achieved?. Patient Educ Couns. 2009, 77 (1): 48-54. 10.1016/j.pec.2009.03.019.CrossRefPubMed
31.
32.
Grootendorst DC, Jager KJ, Zoccali C, Dekker FW: Observational Studies Are Complementary to Randomized Controlled Trials. Nephron Clin Pract. 2009, 114 (3): c173-c177. 10.1159/000262299.CrossRefPubMed
33.
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, et al: The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting of observational studies. Internist (Berl). 2008, 49 (6): 688-693. 10.1007/s00108-008-2138-4.CrossRef
34.
Wensing M, Elwyn G, Edwards A, Vingerhoets E, Grol R: Deconstructing patient centred communication and uncovering shared decision making: an observational study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2002, 2: 2-10.1186/1472-6947-2-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz RI: Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000, 342 (25): 1887-1892. 10.1056/NEJM200006223422507.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Protheroe J, Bower P, Chew-Graham C: The use of mixed methodology in evaluating complex interventions: identifying patient factors that moderate the effects of a decision aid. Fam Pract. 2007, 24 (6): 594-600. 10.1093/fampra/cmm066.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M, et al: Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008, 337: a1655-10.1136/bmj.a1655.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Lewin S, Glenton C, Oxman AD: Use of qualitative methods alongside randomised controlled trials of complex healthcare interventions: methodological study. BMJ. 2009, 339: b3496-10.1136/bmj.b3496.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Christensen B, editor: Forebyggelse af iskæmisk hjerte-kar-sygdom i almen praksis [Prevention of ischaemic cardiovascular disease in general practice]. 2007, Copenhagen: Dansk Selskab for Almen Medicin, 3
40.
Zwarenstein M, Treweek S, Gagnier JJ, Altman DG, Tunis S, Haynes B, et al: Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. BMJ. 2008, 337: a2390-10.1136/bmj.a2390.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P, CONSORT Group: Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2008, 148 (4): 295-309.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Lundgren-Laine H, Salantera S: Think-Aloud Technique and Protocol Analysis in Clinical Decision-Making Research. Qual Health Res. 2009, 20 (4): 565-75. 10.1177/1049732309354278.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Darker CD, French DP: What sense do people make of a theory of planned behaviour questionnaire?: a think-aloud study. J Health Psychol. 2009, 14 (7): 861-871. 10.1177/1359105309340983.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Emerson RM, Fretz RI, Shaw L: Writing ethnographic fieldnotes Chicago. 1995, University of Chicago PressCrossRef
45.
Geertz C: The interpretation of cultures; selected essays. 1973, New York, Basic Books
46.
Lingard L, Albert M, Levinson W: Grounded theory, mixed methods, and action research. BMJ. 2008, 337: a567-10.1136/bmj.39602.690162.47.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Leykum LK, Pugh JA, Lanham HJ, Harmon J, McDaniel RR: Implementation research design: integrating participatory action research into randomized controlled trials. Implement Sci. 2009, 4: 69-10.1186/1748-5908-4-69.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
48.
Reason P, Bradbury H, editors: Handbook of action research. Participative Inquiry and Practice. 2006, London: SAGE, 2
49.
Reeves S, Kuper A, Hodges BD: Qualitative research methodologies: ethnography. BMJ. 2008, 337: a1020-10.1136/bmj.a1020.CrossRefPubMed
50.
O'Byrne P: The advantages and disadvantages of mixing methods: an analysis of combining traditional and autoethnographic approaches. Qual Health Res. 2007, 17 (10): 1381-1391. 10.1177/1049732307308304.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Hammersley M, Atkinson P: Ethnography: principles in practice. 2007, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon; Routledge
52.
Morisky DE, Green LW, Levine DM: Concurrent and predictive validity of a self-reported measure of medication adherence. Med Care. 1986, 24 (1): 67-74. 10.1097/00005650-198601000-00007.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Shalansky SJ, Levy AR, Ignaszewski AP: Self-reported Morisky score for identifying nonadherence with cardiovascular medications. Ann Pharmacother. 2004, 38 (9): 1363-1368. 10.1345/aph.1E071.CrossRefPubMed
54.
Morisky DE, Ang A, Krousel-Wood M, Ward HJ: Predictive validity of a medication adherence measure in an outpatient setting. J Clin Hypertens. 2008, Greenwich, 10 (5): 348-354. 10.1111/j.1751-7176.2008.07572.x.
55.
Gandek B, Ware JE, Aaronson NK, Apolone G, Bjorner JB, Brazier JE, et al: Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998, 51 (11): 1171-1178. 10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00109-7.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Eriksson I, Unden AL, Elofsson S: Self-rated health. Comparisons between three different measures. Results from a population study. Int J Epidemiol. 2001, 30 (2): 326-333. 10.1093/ije/30.2.326.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Idler EL, Benyamini Y: Self-rated health and mortality: a review of twenty-seven community studies. J Health Soc Behav. 1997, 38 (1): 21-37. 10.2307/2955359.CrossRefPubMed
58.
Idler EL, Kasl S: Health perceptions and survival: do global evaluations of health status really predict mortality?. J Gerontol. 1991, 46 (2): S55-65.CrossRefPubMed
59.
Jylha M, Leskinen E, Alanen E, Leskinen AL, Heikkinen E: Self-rated health and associated factors among men of different ages. J Gerontol. 1986, 41 (6): 710-717.CrossRefPubMed
60.
Krause NM, Jay GM: What do global self-rated health items measure?. Med Care. 1994, 32 (9): 930-942. 10.1097/00005650-199409000-00004.CrossRefPubMed
61.
Lundberg O, Manderbacka K: Assessing reliability of a measure of self-rated health. Scand J Soc Med. 1996, 24 (3): 218-224.PubMed
62.
Manderbacka K: Examining what self-rated health question is understood to mean by respondents. Scand J Soc Med. 1998, 26 (2): 145-153.PubMed
63.
Manderbacka K, Lahelma E, Martikainen P: Examining the continuity of self-rated health. Int J Epidemiol. 1998, 27 (2): 208-213. 10.1093/ije/27.2.208.CrossRefPubMed
64.
Moller L, Kristensen TS, Hollnagel H: Self rated health as a predictor of coronary heart disease in Copenhagen, Denmark. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1996, 50 (4): 423-428. 10.1136/jech.50.4.423.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
65.
Howie JG, Heaney DJ, Maxwell M, Walker JJ: A comparison of a Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) against two established satisfaction scales as an outcome measure of primary care consultations. Fam Pract. 1998, 15 (2): 165-171. 10.1093/fampra/15.2.165.CrossRefPubMed
66.
Edwards A, Elwyn G, Hood K, Robling M, Atwell C, Holmes-Rovner M, et al: The development of COMRADE--a patient-based outcome measure to evaluate the effectiveness of risk communication and treatment decision making in consultations. Patient Educ Couns. 2003, 50 (3): 311-322. 10.1016/S0738-3991(03)00055-7.CrossRefPubMed
67.
Dolan JG: A method for evaluating health care providers' decision making: the Provider Decision Process Assessment Instrument. Med Decis Making. 1999, 19 (1): 38-41. 10.1177/0272989X9901900105.CrossRefPubMed
68.
Green JA, Thorogood N: Qualitative methods for health research Thousand Oaks, CA. 2004, Sage Publications
69.
Patton MQ: Qualitative research and evaluation methods Thousand Oaks, Calif. 2002, Sage Publications
70.
American Anthropological Association (AAA): AAA Ethics. --- Either ISSN or Journal title must be supplied..
Metadata
Title
The RISAP-study: a complex intervention in risk communication and shared decision-making in general practice
Authors
Pia Kirkegaard
Adrian GK Edwards
Bo Hansen
Mette D Hansen
Morten SA Jensen
Torsten Lauritzen
Mette B Risoer
Janus L Thomsen
Publication date
01-12-2010
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Primary Care / Issue 1/2010
Electronic ISSN: 2731-4553
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-11-70

Other articles of this Issue 1/2010

BMC Primary Care 1/2010 Go to the issue

Research article

General practitioners and tutors' experiences with peer group academic detailing: a qualitative study

Research article

Priority setting in primary health care - dilemmas and opportunities: a focus group study

Research article

Effect of a primary health-care-based controlled trial for cardiorespiratory fitness in refugee women

Research article

Primary care physicians' use of family history for cancer risk assessment

Study protocol

Protocol for the MoleMate™ UK Trial: a randomised controlled trial of the MoleMate system in the management of pigmented skin lesions in primary care [ISRCTN 79932379]

Study protocol

Childhood abdominal pain in primary care: design and patient selection of the HONEUR abdominal pain cohort