Key result
ICD decision aids trend toward greater concordance between longevity values and ICD decisions versus usual care.
Why the study?
Reimbursement mandates have increased the need for decision aids in ICD care, but none had been formally evaluated for patients considering primary prevention ICDs.
Do decision aids improve acceptability, feasibility, and value concordance in heart failure patients considering primary prevention ICDs?
RCT (n=21)
2:1
Yes
Do decision aids improve acceptability, feasibility, and value concordance in heart failure patients considering primary prevention ICDs?
Decision aids for primary prevention ICDs are feasible, highly acceptable to patients, and may improve concordance between patient values and clinical decisions.
Decision aids show high feasibility and acceptability for primary prevention ICDs; extends limited RCT evidence on value concordance in heart failure.
BACKGROUND: Using DAs for preference-sensitive decisions is an evidence-based way to improve patient-centered decisions. Reimbursement mandates have increased the need for DAs in ICD care, although none have been formally evaluated. The objectives were to develop and pilot implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) decision aids (DAs) for patients considering primary prevention ICDs. METHODS: conversation aid, a four-page in-depth paper tool, a 17-minute video, and an interactive website. Trial Phase: At three sites, patients with heart failure who were eligible for primary prevention ICDs were randomly assigned 2:1 to intervention (received DAs) or control (usual care). We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation exploring acceptability and feasibility. RESULTS: Twenty-one eligible patients enrolled (15 intervention). Most intervention participants found the DAs to be unbiased (67%), helpful (89%), and would recommend them to others (100%). The pilot was feasible at all sites; however, using clinic staff to identify eligible patients was more efficient than chart review. Although the main goals were to measure acceptability and feasibility, intervention participants trended towards increased concordance between longevity values and ICD decisions (71% concordant vs. 29%, p = .06). Participants preferred the in-depth paper tool and video DAs. Access to a nurse during the decision-making window encouraged questions and improved participant-perceived confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Participants felt the DAs provided helpful, balanced information that they would recommend to other patients. Further exploration of this larger context of DA use and strategies to promote independent use related to electrophysiology (EP) visits are needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wallace et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in Heart failure eligible for primary prevention ICDs (n=21). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) decision aids vs. Usual care was evaluated on Concordance between longevity values and ICD decisions (p=.06). Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator decision aids trended towards increased concordance between longevity values and ICD decisions compared to usual care (71% vs. 29%, p=0.06).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: