Eintrag weiter verarbeiten
0512 Impact of a Patient Decision-Aid When Selecting Insomnia Treatments and Factors Associated with Decisional Conflict: Preliminary Findings from an Ongoing Pragmatic Clinical Tr...
Gespeichert in:
| Zeitschriftentitel: | Sleep |
|---|---|
| Personen und Körperschaften: | , , , |
| In: | Sleep, 43, 2020, Supplement_1, S. A196-A196 |
| Format: | E-Article |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| veröffentlicht: |
Oxford University Press (OUP)
|
| Schlagwörter: |
| Zusammenfassung: | <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Introduction</jats:title> <jats:p>Preferences play an important role in determining insomnia treatment outcomes, but the validity of patient choice is rarely assessed. Uninformed preferences can lead to decisional conflict, which can negatively impact on treatment initiation, adherence, and subsequent outcomes. The current study aims to evaluate the impact of integrating a patient decision-aid as part of a pragmatic clinical trial and to identify baseline covariates associated with clinically significant decisional conflict (CSDC).</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Methods</jats:title> <jats:p>Secondary analysis of an ongoing pragmatic clinical trial for a two-stage cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) intervention was undertaken. Participants were referred from primary care clinics in Quebec City, Canada. Upon enrolment, participants were guided by a decision-aid, outlining the risks and benefits of prospective treatment options, when selecting their preferred arm of treatment in Phase 1. Options included SHUTi, SHUTi combined with an existing medication or continuing usual treatment with medication alone. Participants also completed a battery of sleep and mental health measures at baseline. Prior to treatment initiation, the 4-item SURE (Sure of myself; Understand information; Risk-Benefit ratio; Encouragement) scale was administered to screen for CSDC. Relationships between CSDC and baseline covariates were explored using Pearson correlations.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Of the 55 participants initially enrolled, 94.5% (n=52) of participants preferentially selected SHUTi, either as sole treatment (n=24) or in combination with an existing medication (n=28), over usual treatment with medication alone (n=3). Overall, CSDC was only reported by 5.5% (n=3) of the sample population, with no group differences observed, suggesting effective clarification of treatment options through the decision-aid. Interestingly, higher SURE scores (i.e. less decisional conflict) were negatively correlated with depressive symptoms (r= -0.295, n= 55, p= 0.029) and anxiety symptoms (r= -0.301, n= 55, p= 0.026). Correlations with age, insomnia symptoms, duration of insomnia and fatigue were not statistically significant.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title> <jats:p>The patient decision-aid appeared to resolve decisional conflict for 94.5% (n=52) of participants. Findings allude to the potential influence of emotional status on information processing pathways in an insomnia context, warranting further research.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Support</jats:title> <jats:p>Research supported by a grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR-IRSC:0441002152).</jats:p> </jats:sec> |
|---|---|
| Umfang: | A196-A196 |
| ISSN: |
0161-8105
1550-9109 |
| DOI: | 10.1093/sleep/zsaa056.509 |