The Use of a Patient Decision Aid in the Choice of Surgery for Herniated Disc
NCT ID: NCT03884387
Last Updated: 2024-07-23
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
142 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-05-22
2020-08-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Return to Work After Early Intervention for Lumbar Disc Herniation Versus Usual Care
NCT04657354
Artificial Intelligence Enabled Decision Support for Selection of Patients for Lumbar Spine Surgery
NCT06806969
The Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of Two Quantitative Clinical Tests in Patients With Lumbar Disc Herniation
NCT03832036
Comparison of the Effect of Lumbar Traction, Spinal Manipulation, and Surgery in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation
NCT03118271
Disc Prosthesis Versus Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation
NCT00394732
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The overall purpose of this study is to assess the effectiveness of a generic PtDA-template adapted to patients choosing between surgical and non-surgical treatment for LDH, on SDM, decisional conflict, decision regret and treatment outcomes in a randomized controlled trial. Development of an effective PtDA has the potential to decrease patients' decision regret and optimize treatment results and thereby in the future lead to higher patient satisfaction and fewer patient complaints. Using a generic PtDA-template, makes it feasible to adapt the used method to other spine-departments or other orthopedic-surgeries.
Background
Shared decision making (SDM) is a systematic approach aimed at improving patient involvement in preference-sensitive health care decisions. It is a process, wherein clinicians actively involve patients during the task of making decisions , based on best clinical evidence and patients' informed preferences.
Most people with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) improve with nonsurgical treatment. However, in Denmark, patients with ongoing severe pain and disability after 12 weeks of conservative care are recommended a surgical evaluation. Apart from the presence of a neurologic deficit, there are no clearly defined indications for surgery. A variety of factors, such as level of pain, walking capacity or functional limitations, can influence the judgment of the physician to advocate surgery or not. Indications for surgery are thus assessed, for each particular patient, by the individual surgeon. Even though surgical patients show a more rapid relief of pain and recovery, the evidence of surgery being superior to conservative treatment in the long term is nevertheless inconclusive. This underlines the concept that the choice of having surgical or non-surgical treatment for LHD is preference sensitive, meaning that treatment options should be offered and should matter to patients. A qualitative study by Andersen showed that the current lack of evidence for a superior treatment choice and the presence of uncertainties in risks and benefits are important to discuss with patients with LDH. Currently, there are no standard procedures used to actively involve patients in such decisions. SDM is required to accomplish the preference sensitive approach for patients with LDH.
Patient decision aids (PtDA) are tools designed to facilitate SDM, and are intended to complement counseling with health professionals. Such a tool could help patients become involved in decision making by making explicit the decision that needs to be made, providing information about the advantages and disadvantages of treatment options (or tests), knowledge of treatment outcomes, and by clarifying personal values. Decision Aids compared to usual care seems to improve decision quality and patient knowledge regarding options and reduce their decisional conflict. Some studies also show that PtDAs enable patients to be more actively involved in decision making, and improve the accuracy of risk perceptions when probabilities are included A few English tools have already been designed for patients with LDH. However, these tools were designed to prepare the patients, prior to consultation with a physician and not, as intended in this project, to be used in the clinical encounter. Therefore, prior to this study a PtDAs have been designed and tested for use in spine surgery in a Danish context.
Study 1 - Does the use of a decision aid in a spine surgery clinic facilitate SDM?
Objectives
The Objectives are to determine whether the use of a DA is superior to standard consultation, in terms of:
1. Involving and informing the patients in the decision of treatment.
2. Minimizing uncertainty, and other conflicting factors, when choosing treatment for herniated disc.
Methods
Design The study will be performed as a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Ten surgeons will be allocated to either using or not using a DA in the surgery clinic, in a 1:1 ratio.
Intervention The intervention is the use of a PtDA for LDH, in a routine doctor-patient consultation, by a trained spine surgeon. All surgeons randomized to use the PtDA will go through a training session held by educators in communication, who is specialized in SDM.
Study population Study subjects will be recruited from Center for Spine Surgery and Research, Lillebaelt Hospital, Middelfart, amongst patients being a candidate for primary discectomy for a LDH from L1-S1.
Data will be collected post consultation in both arms, as the patients exit the consultation.
Statistics (see study 2)
Study 2 - Does the use of a decision aid in a spine surgery clinic improve outcomes?
Objectives
The objectives are to determine if there is a correlation between the use of a DA in the consultation and:
1. Better recovery after treatment, measured by leg pain (VAS leg), back pain (VAS back), ODI and EQ5D, one month and one year after spine surgery.
2. The level of decisional regret one month and one year after chosen treatment.
Methods
Design, intervention and study-population will be the same as in study 2. However, if patients end up with other surgery than discectomy they will be excluded from the study.
Statistical analysis
As the DQW-HD, DCS, ODI, EQ-5D and VAS Leg and Back pain scores are long ordinal scales, differences in scores, between the groups will be tested using nonparametric Mann-Whitney test for independent samples. Sample size rationale was powered from the main outcome variable in study 3 VAS-leg. Allowing for 30% dropout before completing the study, we need to enroll 70 patients in each arm. All Statistical analyses will be performed using Stata v. 14.0.
Research plan The inclusion started in May 2017. All the patients in the RCT are included and one month follow-up data are collected. Collection of one year follow-up data will has also begun.
Practical framework
All Spine surgeons at the surgery department accepted to participate in the study. Patients were recruited by these surgeons. The research department assists with data-collection at one month and one year follow-up.
Publication and dissemination of results
Results will be published in national and international peer-reviewed journals (i.e. The Spine, The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research) and presented at national and international conferences (i.e. Dansk Ortopædkirurgisk Selskabs årsmøde (DOS), International Shared Decision Making conference (ISDM), International Conference on Communication in Health Care (ICCH).
Ethical aspects
The study will be conducted according to Danish ethical principles, and notified at the Danish Data Protection Agency. Participants will be given written information about the purpose of the study and will sign an informed consent before the first questionnaires are completed. Surgeons give oral consent. Apart from the use of a PtDA in the consultation, all patients in the study receive "usual care". No changes are made in relation to which clinicians the patients meet or offered treatment.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
OTHER
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Use of a Patient Decision Aid
A Patient Decision Aid is used in this arm in the clinical encounter. A tool designed to facilitate shared decision making when patients choose between surgical and non-surgical treatment for lumbar disc herniation .
Patient Decision Aid
The Patient Decision aid used in this project is a tool designed to facilitate shared decision making in patients with lumbar herniated disk. It is intended to complement counseling with health professionals and help patients become involved in decision making by making explicit the decision that needs to be made, providing information about the advantages and disadvantages of having or not having surgery, knowledge of treatment outcomes, and by clarifying personal values.
Usual counceling
Usual counseling in the clinical encounter, when patients choose between surgical and non-surgical treatment for lumbar disc herniation .
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Patient Decision Aid
The Patient Decision aid used in this project is a tool designed to facilitate shared decision making in patients with lumbar herniated disk. It is intended to complement counseling with health professionals and help patients become involved in decision making by making explicit the decision that needs to be made, providing information about the advantages and disadvantages of having or not having surgery, knowledge of treatment outcomes, and by clarifying personal values.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Clinical symptoms and concordant MRI findings of a LDH from L1 to S1 with possible indication for primary discectomy surgery, assessed by an experienced spinal surgeon
* Age \>18
* Able to understand and read Danish
* Informed consent
Exclusion Criteria
* Diagnosis of psychiatric disorder
* Manifest paresis disorder
* Previous spine surgery
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Southern Denmark
OTHER
Spine Centre of Southern Denmark
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Stina Lykke Brogård Andersen
Ph.d. student
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Stina B Andersen, MHS
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Sygehus Lillebaelt
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Middelfart spine surgery research department
Middelfart, , Denmark
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
16/1586
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.