A web-based clinical decision tool to support treatment decision-making in psychiatry: A pilot focus group study with clinicians, patients and carers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

A web-based clinical decision tool to support treatment decision-making in psychiatry: A pilot focus group study with clinicians, patients and carers. / Henshall, Catherine; Marzano, Lisa; Smith, Katharine; Attenburrow, Mary Jane; Puntis, Stephen; Zlodre, Jakov; Kelly, Kathleen; Broome, Matthew R.; Shaw, Susan; Barrera, Alvaro; Molodynski, Andrew; Reid, Alastair; Geddes, John R.; Cipriani, Andrea.

In: BMC Psychiatry, Vol. 17, No. 1, 265, 21.07.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Henshall, C, Marzano, L, Smith, K, Attenburrow, MJ, Puntis, S, Zlodre, J, Kelly, K, Broome, MR, Shaw, S, Barrera, A, Molodynski, A, Reid, A, Geddes, JR & Cipriani, A 2017, 'A web-based clinical decision tool to support treatment decision-making in psychiatry: A pilot focus group study with clinicians, patients and carers', BMC Psychiatry, vol. 17, no. 1, 265. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-017-1406-z

APA

Henshall, C., Marzano, L., Smith, K., Attenburrow, M. J., Puntis, S., Zlodre, J., Kelly, K., Broome, M. R., Shaw, S., Barrera, A., Molodynski, A., Reid, A., Geddes, J. R., & Cipriani, A. (2017). A web-based clinical decision tool to support treatment decision-making in psychiatry: A pilot focus group study with clinicians, patients and carers. BMC Psychiatry, 17(1), [265]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-017-1406-z

Vancouver

Author

Henshall, Catherine ; Marzano, Lisa ; Smith, Katharine ; Attenburrow, Mary Jane ; Puntis, Stephen ; Zlodre, Jakov ; Kelly, Kathleen ; Broome, Matthew R. ; Shaw, Susan ; Barrera, Alvaro ; Molodynski, Andrew ; Reid, Alastair ; Geddes, John R. ; Cipriani, Andrea. / A web-based clinical decision tool to support treatment decision-making in psychiatry: A pilot focus group study with clinicians, patients and carers. In: BMC Psychiatry. 2017 ; Vol. 17, No. 1.

Bibtex

@article{4d2868ddf85a4feda413778033b5b130,
title = "A web-based clinical decision tool to support treatment decision-making in psychiatry:: A pilot focus group study with clinicians, patients and carers",
abstract = "Background: Treatment decision tools have been developed in many fields of medicine, including psychiatry, however benefits for patients have not been sustained once the support is withdrawn. We have developed a web-based computerised clinical decision support tool (CDST), which can provide patients and clinicians with continuous, up-to-date, personalised information about the efficacy and tolerability of competing interventions. To test the feasibility and acceptability of the CDST we conducted a focus group study, aimed to explore the views of clinicians, patients and carers. Methods: The CDST was developed in Oxford. To tailor treatments at an individual level, the CDST combines the best available evidence from the scientific literature with patient preferences and values, and with patient medical profile to generate personalised clinical recommendations. We conducted three focus groups comprising of three different participant types: consultant psychiatrists, participants with a mental health diagnosis and/or experience of caring for someone with a mental health diagnosis, and primary care practitioners and nurses. Each 1-h focus group started with a short visual demonstration of the CDST. To standardise the discussion during the focus groups, we used the same topic guide that covered themes relating to the acceptability and usability of the CDST. Focus groups were recorded and any identifying participant details were anonymised. Data were analysed thematically and managed using the Framework method and the constant comparative method. Results: The focus groups took place in Oxford between October 2016 and January 2017. Overall 31 participants attended (12 consultants, 11 primary care practitioners and 8 patients or carers). The main themes that emerged related to CDST applications in clinical practice, communication, conflicting priorities, record keeping and data management. CDST was considered a useful clinical decision support, with recognised value in promoting clinician-patient collaboration and contributing to the development of personalised medicine. One major benefit of the CDST was perceived to be the open discussion about the possible side-effects of medications. Participants from all the three groups, however, universally commented that the terminology and language presented on the CDST were too medicalised, potentially leading to ethical issues around consent to treatment. Conclusions: The CDST can improve communication pathways between patients, carers and clinicians, identifying care priorities and providing an up-to-date platform for implementing evidence-based practice, with regard to prescribing practices.",
keywords = "Decision making, Evidence based decision tool, Focus group, Treatment algorithm",
author = "Catherine Henshall and Lisa Marzano and Katharine Smith and Attenburrow, {Mary Jane} and Stephen Puntis and Jakov Zlodre and Kathleen Kelly and Broome, {Matthew R.} and Susan Shaw and Alvaro Barrera and Andrew Molodynski and Alastair Reid and Geddes, {John R.} and Andrea Cipriani",
year = "2017",
month = jul,
day = "21",
doi = "10.1186/s12888-017-1406-z",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
journal = "BMC Psychiatry",
issn = "1471-244X",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - A web-based clinical decision tool to support treatment decision-making in psychiatry:

T2 - A pilot focus group study with clinicians, patients and carers

AU - Henshall, Catherine

AU - Marzano, Lisa

AU - Smith, Katharine

AU - Attenburrow, Mary Jane

AU - Puntis, Stephen

AU - Zlodre, Jakov

AU - Kelly, Kathleen

AU - Broome, Matthew R.

AU - Shaw, Susan

AU - Barrera, Alvaro

AU - Molodynski, Andrew

AU - Reid, Alastair

AU - Geddes, John R.

AU - Cipriani, Andrea

PY - 2017/7/21

Y1 - 2017/7/21

N2 - Background: Treatment decision tools have been developed in many fields of medicine, including psychiatry, however benefits for patients have not been sustained once the support is withdrawn. We have developed a web-based computerised clinical decision support tool (CDST), which can provide patients and clinicians with continuous, up-to-date, personalised information about the efficacy and tolerability of competing interventions. To test the feasibility and acceptability of the CDST we conducted a focus group study, aimed to explore the views of clinicians, patients and carers. Methods: The CDST was developed in Oxford. To tailor treatments at an individual level, the CDST combines the best available evidence from the scientific literature with patient preferences and values, and with patient medical profile to generate personalised clinical recommendations. We conducted three focus groups comprising of three different participant types: consultant psychiatrists, participants with a mental health diagnosis and/or experience of caring for someone with a mental health diagnosis, and primary care practitioners and nurses. Each 1-h focus group started with a short visual demonstration of the CDST. To standardise the discussion during the focus groups, we used the same topic guide that covered themes relating to the acceptability and usability of the CDST. Focus groups were recorded and any identifying participant details were anonymised. Data were analysed thematically and managed using the Framework method and the constant comparative method. Results: The focus groups took place in Oxford between October 2016 and January 2017. Overall 31 participants attended (12 consultants, 11 primary care practitioners and 8 patients or carers). The main themes that emerged related to CDST applications in clinical practice, communication, conflicting priorities, record keeping and data management. CDST was considered a useful clinical decision support, with recognised value in promoting clinician-patient collaboration and contributing to the development of personalised medicine. One major benefit of the CDST was perceived to be the open discussion about the possible side-effects of medications. Participants from all the three groups, however, universally commented that the terminology and language presented on the CDST were too medicalised, potentially leading to ethical issues around consent to treatment. Conclusions: The CDST can improve communication pathways between patients, carers and clinicians, identifying care priorities and providing an up-to-date platform for implementing evidence-based practice, with regard to prescribing practices.

AB - Background: Treatment decision tools have been developed in many fields of medicine, including psychiatry, however benefits for patients have not been sustained once the support is withdrawn. We have developed a web-based computerised clinical decision support tool (CDST), which can provide patients and clinicians with continuous, up-to-date, personalised information about the efficacy and tolerability of competing interventions. To test the feasibility and acceptability of the CDST we conducted a focus group study, aimed to explore the views of clinicians, patients and carers. Methods: The CDST was developed in Oxford. To tailor treatments at an individual level, the CDST combines the best available evidence from the scientific literature with patient preferences and values, and with patient medical profile to generate personalised clinical recommendations. We conducted three focus groups comprising of three different participant types: consultant psychiatrists, participants with a mental health diagnosis and/or experience of caring for someone with a mental health diagnosis, and primary care practitioners and nurses. Each 1-h focus group started with a short visual demonstration of the CDST. To standardise the discussion during the focus groups, we used the same topic guide that covered themes relating to the acceptability and usability of the CDST. Focus groups were recorded and any identifying participant details were anonymised. Data were analysed thematically and managed using the Framework method and the constant comparative method. Results: The focus groups took place in Oxford between October 2016 and January 2017. Overall 31 participants attended (12 consultants, 11 primary care practitioners and 8 patients or carers). The main themes that emerged related to CDST applications in clinical practice, communication, conflicting priorities, record keeping and data management. CDST was considered a useful clinical decision support, with recognised value in promoting clinician-patient collaboration and contributing to the development of personalised medicine. One major benefit of the CDST was perceived to be the open discussion about the possible side-effects of medications. Participants from all the three groups, however, universally commented that the terminology and language presented on the CDST were too medicalised, potentially leading to ethical issues around consent to treatment. Conclusions: The CDST can improve communication pathways between patients, carers and clinicians, identifying care priorities and providing an up-to-date platform for implementing evidence-based practice, with regard to prescribing practices.

KW - Decision making

KW - Evidence based decision tool

KW - Focus group

KW - Treatment algorithm

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85025104167&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12888-017-1406-z

DO - 10.1186/s12888-017-1406-z

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85025104167

VL - 17

JO - BMC Psychiatry

JF - BMC Psychiatry

SN - 1471-244X

IS - 1

M1 - 265

ER -