Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Osteoporosis International 10/2020

01-10-2020 | Osteoporosis | Review

Quality and effectiveness of osteoporosis treatment decision aids: a systematic review and environmental scan

Authors: Z. Paskins, V. D. Torres Roldan, A. W. Hawarden, L. Bullock, S. Meritxell Urtecho, G. F. Torres, L. Morera, N. R. Espinoza Suarez, A. Worrall, S. Blackburn, S. Chapman, C. Jinks, J. P. Brito

Published in: Osteoporosis International | Issue 10/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Decision aids (DAs) are evidence-based tools that support shared decision-making (SDM) implementation in practice; this study aimed to identify existing osteoporosis DAs and assess their quality and efficacy; and to gain feedback from a patient advisory group on findings and implications for further research. We searched multiple bibliographic databases to identify research studies from 2000 to 2019 and undertook an environmental scan (search conducted February 2019, repeated in March 2020). A pair of reviewers, working independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, evaluated each trial’s risk of bias, and conducted DA quality assessment using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). Public contributors (patients and caregivers with experience of osteoporosis and fragility fractures) participated in discussion groups to review a sample of DAs, express preferences for a new DA, and discuss plans for development of a new DA. We identified 6 studies, with high or unclear risk of bias. Across included studies, use of an osteoporosis DA was reported to result in reduced decisional conflict compared with baseline, increased SDM, and increased accuracy of patients’ perceived fracture risk compared with controls. Eleven DAs were identified, of which none met the full set of IPDAS criteria for certification for minimization of bias. Public contributors expressed preferences for encounter DAs that are individualized to patients’ own needs and risk. Using a systematic review and environmental scan, we identified 11 decision aids to inform patient decisions about osteoporosis treatment and 6 studies evaluating their effectiveness. Use of decision aids increased accuracy of risk perception and shared decision-making but the decision aids themselves fail to comprehensively meet international quality standards and patient needs, underpinning the need for new DA development.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
4.
go back to reference Cramer JA, Gold DT, Silverman SL, Lewiecki EM (2007) A systematic review of persistence and compliance with bisphosphonates for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 18:1023–1031CrossRef Cramer JA, Gold DT, Silverman SL, Lewiecki EM (2007) A systematic review of persistence and compliance with bisphosphonates for osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 18:1023–1031CrossRef
5.
go back to reference McHorney CA, Schousboe JT, Cline RR, Weiss TW (2007) The impact of osteoporosis medication beliefs and side-effect experiences on non-adherence to oral bisphosphonates. Curr Med Res Opin 23:3137–3152CrossRef McHorney CA, Schousboe JT, Cline RR, Weiss TW (2007) The impact of osteoporosis medication beliefs and side-effect experiences on non-adherence to oral bisphosphonates. Curr Med Res Opin 23:3137–3152CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Khosla S, Shane E (2016) A crisis in the treatment of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 31:1485–1487CrossRef Khosla S, Shane E (2016) A crisis in the treatment of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 31:1485–1487CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Joseph-Williams N, Newcombe R, Politi M, Durand MA, Sivell S, Stacey D, O’Connor A, Volk RJ, Edwards A, Bennett C, Pignone M, Thomson R, Elwyn G (2014) Toward minimum standards for certifying patient decision aids: a modified delphi consensus process. Med Decis Mak 34:699–710. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X13501721CrossRef Joseph-Williams N, Newcombe R, Politi M, Durand MA, Sivell S, Stacey D, O’Connor A, Volk RJ, Edwards A, Bennett C, Pignone M, Thomson R, Elwyn G (2014) Toward minimum standards for certifying patient decision aids: a modified delphi consensus process. Med Decis Mak 34:699–710. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​0272989X13501721​CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Vaisson G, Provencher T, Dugas M, Trottier M-E, Chipenda-Dansokho S, Colquhoun H, Fagerlin A, Giguere A, Hakim H, Haslett L, Hoffman A, Ivers N, Julien A-S, Legare F, Renaud J-S, Stacey D, Volk R, Witteman H (2019) User involvement in the development of patient decision aids: a systematic review. https://doi.org/10.31219/OSF.IO/QYFKP Vaisson G, Provencher T, Dugas M, Trottier M-E, Chipenda-Dansokho S, Colquhoun H, Fagerlin A, Giguere A, Hakim H, Haslett L, Hoffman A, Ivers N, Julien A-S, Legare F, Renaud J-S, Stacey D, Volk R, Witteman H (2019) User involvement in the development of patient decision aids: a systematic review. https://​doi.​org/​10.​31219/​OSF.​IO/​QYFKP
14.
go back to reference Torres-Roldan V, Urtecho LM, Espinoza N, Organick P, Thota A, Brito JP (2019) A systematic review and environmental scan of decision aids for osteoporosis: a review protocol. In: PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019126787. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID = CRD42019126787. Accessed 23 Dec 2019 Torres-Roldan V, Urtecho LM, Espinoza N, Organick P, Thota A, Brito JP (2019) A systematic review and environmental scan of decision aids for osteoporosis: a review protocol. In: PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019126787. https://​www.​crd.​york.​ac.​uk/​prospero/​display_​record.​php?​ID = CRD42019126787. Accessed 23 Dec 2019
16.
go back to reference Graham P, Evitts T, Thomas-MacLean R (2008) Environmental scans: how useful are they for primary care research? Can Fam Physician 54:1022–1023PubMedPubMedCentral Graham P, Evitts T, Thomas-MacLean R (2008) Environmental scans: how useful are they for primary care research? Can Fam Physician 54:1022–1023PubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Doria N, Condran B, Boulos L, Curtis Maillet DG, Dowling L, Levy A (2018) Sharpening the focus: differentiating between focus groups for patient engagement vs. qualitative research. Res Involv Engagem 4:19CrossRef Doria N, Condran B, Boulos L, Curtis Maillet DG, Dowling L, Levy A (2018) Sharpening the focus: differentiating between focus groups for patient engagement vs. qualitative research. Res Involv Engagem 4:19CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Cranney A, Simon LS, Tugwell P, Adachi R, Guyatt G (2009) Postmenopausal osteoporosis. In: Tugwell P, Shea B, Boers M, Brooks P, Simon L, Strand V, Wells G (eds) Evidence-based rheumatology. BMJ Books, pp 183–242 Cranney A, Simon LS, Tugwell P, Adachi R, Guyatt G (2009) Postmenopausal osteoporosis. In: Tugwell P, Shea B, Boers M, Brooks P, Simon L, Strand V, Wells G (eds) Evidence-based rheumatology. BMJ Books, pp 183–242
23.
go back to reference Paskins Z, Worrall A, Chapman S (2018) Patient and public views of bisphosphonate decision aids: Not fit for purpose. In: Osteoporosis International. pp S374–S374 Paskins Z, Worrall A, Chapman S (2018) Patient and public views of bisphosphonate decision aids: Not fit for purpose. In: Osteoporosis International. pp S374–S374
24.
25.
go back to reference Lopez-Olivo MA, Ingleshwar A, Volk RJ, Jibaja-Weiss M, Barbo A, Saag K, Leong A, Suarez-Almazor ME (2018) Development and pilot testing of multimedia patient education tools for patients with knee osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, and rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res 70:213–220. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.23271CrossRef Lopez-Olivo MA, Ingleshwar A, Volk RJ, Jibaja-Weiss M, Barbo A, Saag K, Leong A, Suarez-Almazor ME (2018) Development and pilot testing of multimedia patient education tools for patients with knee osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, and rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res 70:213–220. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​acr.​23271CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Oakley S, Walley T (2006) A pilot study assessing the effectiveness of a decision aid on patient adherence with oral bisphosphonate medication. Pharm J 276:536–538 Oakley S, Walley T (2006) A pilot study assessing the effectiveness of a decision aid on patient adherence with oral bisphosphonate medication. Pharm J 276:536–538
31.
go back to reference LeBlanc A, Wang AT, Wyatt K, Branda ME, Shah ND, Van Houten H, Pencille L, Wermers R, Montori VM (2015) Encounter decision aid vs. clinical decision support or usual care to support patient-centered treatment decisions in osteoporosis: the osteoporosis choice randomized trial II. PLoS One 10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128063 LeBlanc A, Wang AT, Wyatt K, Branda ME, Shah ND, Van Houten H, Pencille L, Wermers R, Montori VM (2015) Encounter decision aid vs. clinical decision support or usual care to support patient-centered treatment decisions in osteoporosis: the osteoporosis choice randomized trial II. PLoS One 10. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1371/​journal.​pone.​0128063
35.
go back to reference Van de Velde S, Heselmans A, Delvaux N, Brandt L, Marco-Ruiz L, Spitaels D, Cloetens H, Kortteisto T, Roshanov P, Kunnamo I, Aertgeerts B, Vandvik PO, Flottorp S (2018) A systematic review of trials evaluating success factors of interventions with computerised clinical decision support. Implement Sci 13:114CrossRef Van de Velde S, Heselmans A, Delvaux N, Brandt L, Marco-Ruiz L, Spitaels D, Cloetens H, Kortteisto T, Roshanov P, Kunnamo I, Aertgeerts B, Vandvik PO, Flottorp S (2018) A systematic review of trials evaluating success factors of interventions with computerised clinical decision support. Implement Sci 13:114CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Scalia P, Durand MA, Berkowitz JL, Ramesh NP, Faber MJ, Kremer JAM, Elwyn G (2019) The impact and utility of encounter patient decision aids: systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative synthesis. Patient Educ Couns 102:817–841CrossRef Scalia P, Durand MA, Berkowitz JL, Ramesh NP, Faber MJ, Kremer JAM, Elwyn G (2019) The impact and utility of encounter patient decision aids: systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative synthesis. Patient Educ Couns 102:817–841CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Public Involvement Standards Development Partnership (2019) National Standards for Public Involvement in Research Public Involvement Standards Development Partnership (2019) National Standards for Public Involvement in Research
Metadata
Title
Quality and effectiveness of osteoporosis treatment decision aids: a systematic review and environmental scan
Authors
Z. Paskins
V. D. Torres Roldan
A. W. Hawarden
L. Bullock
S. Meritxell Urtecho
G. F. Torres
L. Morera
N. R. Espinoza Suarez
A. Worrall
S. Blackburn
S. Chapman
C. Jinks
J. P. Brito
Publication date
01-10-2020
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
Osteoporosis International / Issue 10/2020
Print ISSN: 0937-941X
Electronic ISSN: 1433-2965
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-020-05479-w

Other articles of this Issue 10/2020

Osteoporosis International 10/2020 Go to the issue