Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36474942›Full record

ArticleOsteoarthritis and cartilage open2022

An online individualised patient decision aid improves the quality of decisions in patients considering total knee arthroplasty in routine care: A randomized controlled trial.

Nick Bansback, Logan Trenaman, Karen V MacDonald, D'Arcy Durand, Gillian Hawker, Jeffrey A Johnson, Christopher Smith, Dawn Stacey, Deborah A Marshall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Osteoarthritis and cartilage open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Nick BansbackSchool of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Logan TrenamanSchool of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Karen V MacDonaldDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
D'Arcy DurandAlberta Bone and Joint Centre, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Gillian HawkerDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Jeffrey A JohnsonSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Christopher SmithAlberta Bone and Joint Health Institute, AB, Canada.
Dawn StaceySchool of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Deborah A MarshallArthritis Research Canada, Richmond, BC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an online patient decision aid with individualised potential outcomes of surgery, on the quality of decisions for knee replacement surgery in routine clinical care. Design: A pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) in patients considering total knee replacement at a high-volume orthopedic clinic. Patients were randomized at their routine online pre-surgical assessment to either complete a decision aid or not. At their consultation, those in the intervention arm had a surgeon report summarizing the decision aid results. The primary outcome was decision quality, defined as being knowledgeable and choosing the option that matched informed treatment preferences. Multivariate logistic and linear regression analysis was conducted to consider surgeon level clustering and baseline differences between study arms. Results: Of 163 patients randomized, 155 completed post-surgical surveys and were included in the analysis. The average patient was aged 65 years, obese and had moderate to severe osteoarthritis symptoms at baseline. Patients in the intervention arm had a higher odds of making a quality decision (Odds Ratio ​= ​2.08, 95% CI: 1.08 to 4.02), predominantly through increased knowledge. Conclusions: This study supports the benefit of a decision aid in combination with a surgeon report to significantly improve decision quality in routine care. While the independent contribution of tailoring the decision aid to patient baseline characteristics and including a surgeon report remains unclear, we demonstrated the feasibility of integrating the decision aid into an online pre-surgical assessment in routine clinical care.

Indexed as

Decision aidsJoint arthroplastyShared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID36474942
PMCPMC9718273

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.