期刊
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING
卷 34, 期 1, 页码 54-62出版社
SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X13491463
关键词
shared decision making; decisional conflict; clinical checklist; SURE; sensitivity and specificity
资金
- Fonds de recherche en sante du Quebec (Quebec health research funding agency)
- Institut national d'excellence en sante et en services sociaux (national institute for excellence in health and social services)
Background: We sought to determine the psychometric properties of SURE, a 4-item checklist designed to screen for clinically significant decisional conflict in clinical practice. Methods: This study was a secondary analysis of a clustered randomized trial assessing the effect of DECISION+2, a 2-hour online tutorial followed by a 2-hour interactive workshop on shared decision making, on decisions to use antibiotics for acute respiratory infections. Patients completed SURE and also the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), as the gold standard, after consultation. We evaluated internal consistency of SURE using the Kuder-Richardson 20 coefficient (KR-20). We compared DCS and SURE scores using the Spearman correlation coefficient. We assessed sensitivity and specificity of SURE scores (cut-off score 3 out of 4) by identifying patients with and without clinically significant decisional conflict (DCS score >37.5 on a scale of 0-100). Results: Of the 712 patients recruited during the trial, 654 completed both tools. SURE scores showed adequate internal consistency (KR-20 coefficient of 0.7). There was a significant correlation between DCS and SURE scores (Spearman's = -0.45, P < 0.0001). The prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict as estimated by the DCS was 5.2% (95% CI 3.7-7.3). Sensitivity and specificity of SURE 3 were 94.1% (95% CI 78.9-99.0) and 89.8% (95% CI 87.1-92.0), respectively. Conclusions: SURE shows adequate psychometric properties in a primary care population with a low prevalence of clinically significant decisional conflict. SURE has the potential to be a useful screening tool for practitioners, responding to the growing need for detecting clinically significant decisional conflict in patients.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据