What are effective strategies to communicate cardiovascular risk information to patients? A systematic review

Patient Education and Counseling

Volumn 82, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 169-181

  Waldron, Cherry Ann ^a   van der Weijden, Trudy ^b   Ludt, Sabine ^c   Gallacher, John ^a   Elwyn, Glyn ^a  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cardiovascular risk; Patients; Risk communication; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID; ANTICOAGULANT AGENT; CHOLESTEROL; WARFARIN;

AGE; ANTICOAGULANT THERAPY; BEHAVIOR CHANGE; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; DRUG CHOICE; DRUG USE; EMOTIONALITY; FAMILY HISTORY; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; ISCHEMIC HEART DISEASE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT INFORMATION; PERSONAL RISK INFORMATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RISK REDUCTION; SHORT SURVEY; STROKE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; COMMUNICATION; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; HUMANS; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; RISK REDUCTION BEHAVIOR;

EID: 78651479418     PISSN: 07383991     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.04.014     Document Type: Short Survey

References (59)

1. D'Agostino R., Vasan R., Pencina M., Wolf P., Cobain M., Massaro J., et al. General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham heart study. Circulation 2008, 117:743-753.
2. Conroy R., Pyorala K., Fitzgerald A., Sans S., Menotti A., De Backer G., et al. Estimation of ten-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease in Europe: the SCORE project. Eur Heart J 2003, 25:987-1003.
3. Hippisley-Cox J., Coupland C., Vinogradova Y., Robson J., Minhas R., Sheikh A., et al. Predicting cardiovascular risk in England and Wales: prospective derivation and validation of QRISK2. Br Med J 2008, 366:1475-1482.
4. Gigerenzer G., Edwards A. Simple tools for understanding risks: from innumeracy to insight. Br Med J 2003, 327:741-744.
5. Edwards A., Elwyn G., Mulley A. Explaining risks: turning numerical data into meaningful pictures. Br Med J 2002, 324:827-830.
6. Lipkus I.M., Hollands J.G. The visual communication of risk. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1999, 25:149-163.
7. Covey J. A meta-analysis of the effects of presenting treatment benefits in different formats. Med Decis Making 2007, 27:638-654.
8. Cutie C., Weinstein N., Emmons K., Colditz G. A test of numeric formats for communicating risk probabilities. Med Decis Making 2008, 28:377-384.
9. Politi M.C. Communicating the uncertainty of harms and benefits of medical interventions. Med Decis Making 2007, 27:681-695.
10. Lipkus I. Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: suggested best practices and future recommendations. Med Decis Making 2007, 27:696-713.
11. Edwards A., Elwyn G., Covey J., Matthews E., Pill R. Presenting risk information-a review of the effects of 'framing' and other manipulations on patient outcomes. J Health Commun 2001, 6:61-82.
12. Lloyd A.J. The extent of patients' understanding of the risk of treatments. Qual Health Care 2001, 10:i14-i18.
13. Weinstein N.D. What does it mean to understand a risk? Evaluating risk comprehension. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1999, 25:15-20.
14. Edwards A., Thomas R., Williams R., Ellner A.L., Brown P., Elwyn G. Presenting risk information to people with diabetes: evaluating effects and preferences for different formats by a web-based randomised controlled trial. Patient Educ Counsel 2006, 63:336-349.
15. Epping-Jordan J.E., Galea G., Tukuitonga C., Beaglehole R. Preventing chronic diseases: taking stepwise action. Lancet 2005, 366:1667-1671.
16. Ballantyne C., Arroll B., Shepherd J. Lipids and CVD management: towards a global consensus. Eur Heart J 2005, 26:2224-2231.
17. McGill H., McMahan C., Gidding S. Preventing heart disease in the 21st century: implications of the pathobiological determinants of atherosclerosis in youth (PDAY) study. Circulation 2008, 117:1216-1227.
18. Ridker P.M., Cook N. Should age and time be eliminated from cardiovascular risk prediction models?. Circulation 2005, 111:657-658.
19. Angus J., Evans S., Lapum J., Rukholm St.E., Onge R., Nolan R., et al. Sneaky disease': the body and health knowledge for people a risk of coronary heart disease in Ontario, Canada. Soc Sci Med 2005, 60:2117-2128.
20. van Steenkiste B., van der Weijden T., Timmermans D., Vaes J., Stoffers J., Grol R. Patient' ideas, fears and expectations of their coronary risk: barriers for primary prevention. Patient Educ Counsel 2004, 55:301-307.
21. Frijling B.D., Lobo C.M., Keus I.M., Jenks K.M., Akkermans R.P., Hulscher M.E.J.L., et al. Perceptions of cardiovascular risk among patients with hypertension or diabetes. Patient Educ Counsel 2004, 52:47-53.
22. van der Weijden T., Bos L.B.J., Koelewijn-van Loon M.S. Primary care patients' recognition of their won risk for cardiovascular disease: implications for risk communication in practice. Curr Opin Cardiol 2008, 23:471-476.
23. Sheridan S., Viera A., Krantz M., Ice C., Steinman L., Peters K., et al. The effect of giving global coronary risk information to adults. A systematic review. Arch Internal Med 2010, 170:230-239.
24. Downs S., Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998, 52:377-384.
25. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions 2009, 5.0.2 ed. J. Higgins, S. Green (Eds.).
26. Dahl R., Gyrd-Hansen D., Kristiansen I., Nexoe J., Nielsen J. Can postponement of an adverse outcome be used to present risk reductions to a lay audience? A population survey. BMC Med Inform Decis Making 2007, 7:8.
27. Marshall T., Bryan S., Gill P., Greenfield S., Gutridge K., BPP G. Predictors of patients' preferences for treatments to prevent heart disease. Heart 2006, 92:1651-1655.
28. Kristiansen I., Gyrd-Hansen D., Nexoe J., Nielsen J. Number needed to treat: easily understood and intuitively meaningful? Theoretical considerations and a randomized trial. J Clin Epidemiol 2002, 55:888-892.
29. Nexoe J., Kristiansen I., Gyrd-Hansen D., Nielsen J. Influence of number needed to treat, costs and outcome on preferences for a preventive drug. Fam Pract 2005, 22:126-131.
30. Van Steekiste B., Van der Weijden T., Stoffers J., Kester A., Timmermans D., Grol R. Improving cardiovascular risk management: a randomized, controlled trial on the effect of a decision support tool for patients and physicians. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2007, 14:44-50.
31. Krones T., Keller H., Sonnichsen A., Sadowski E.M., Baum E., Wegscheider K., et al. Absolute cardiovascular disease risk and shared decision making in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Fam Med 2008, 6:218-227.
32. Man-Son-Hing M., Laupacis A., O'Connor A., Biggs J., Drake E., Yetisir E., et al. A patient decision aid regarding antithrombotic therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. J Am Med Assoc 1999, 282:737-743.
33. Sheridan S.L., Shadle J., Simpson R.J., Pignone M. The impact of a decision aid about heart disease prevention on patients' discussions with their doctor and their plans for prevention: a pilot randomized trial. BMC Health Serv Res 2006, 6:121.
34. Benner J., Erhardt L., Flammer M., Moller R., Rajicic N., Changela K., et al. A novel programme to evaluate and communicate 10-year risk of CHD reduces predicted risk and improves patients' modifiable risk factor profile. Int J Pharm Pract 2008, 62:1484-1498.
35. Lalonde L., O'Connor A., Duguay P., Brassard J., Drake E., Grover S. Evaluation of a decision aid and a personal risk profile in community pharmacy for patients considering options to improve cardiovascular health: the OPTIONS pilot study. Int J Pharm Pract 2006, 14:51-62.
36. Christian A., Mochari H., Mosca L. Coronary heart disease in ethnically diverse women: risk perception and communication. Mayo Clin Proc 2005, 80:1593-1599.
37. Paterson J., Llewellyn-Thomas H., Naylor C. Using disease risk estimates to guide risk factor interventions: field test of a patient workbook for self-assessing coronary risk. Health Expect 2002, 5:3-15.
38. Charlson M.E., Peterson J.C., Boutin-Foster C., Briggs W.M., Ogedegbe G.G., McCulloch C.E., et al. Changing health behaviours to improve health outcomes after angioplasty: a randomized trial of net present value versus future value risk communication. Health Educ Res 2008, 23:826-839.
39. Grover S.A., Lowensteyn I., Joseph L., Kaouache M., Marchand M., Coupal L., et al. Patient knowledge of coronary risk profile improves the effectiveness of dyslipidemia therapy. Arch Internal Med 2007, 167:2296-2303.
40. Asimakopoulou K.G., Fox C., Spimpolo J., Marsh S., Skinner T.C. The impact of different time frames of risk communication on type 2 diabetes patients' understanding and memory for risk of coronary heart disease and stroke. Diabetes Med 2008, 25:811-817.
41. Straus S. Individualising treatment decisions: the likelihood of being helped or harmed. Eval Health Prof 2002, 25:210-223.
42. Fair A.K., Murray P.G., Thomas A., Cobain M.R. Using hypothetical data to assess the effect of numerical format and context on the perception of coronary heart disease risk. Am J Health Promot 2008, 22:291-296.
43. French D.P., Sutton S.R., Marteau T.M., Kinmonth A.L. The impact of personal and social comparison information about health risk. Br J Health Psychol 2004, 9:197-200.
44. Frileux S., Munoz Sastre M.T., Mullet E., Sorum P.C. The impact of a preventative medical message on intention to change behaviour. Patient Educ Counsel 2004, 52:79-88.
45. Goodyear-Smith F., Arroll B., Chan L., Jackson R., Wells S., Kenealy T. Patients prefer pictures to numbers to express cardiovascular benefit from treatment. Ann Fam Med 2008, 6:213-217.
46. Hux J.E., Naylor D.C. Communicating the benefits of chronic preventive therapy: does the format of efficacy data determine patients' acceptance of treatment?. Med Decis Making 1995, 15:152-157.
47. Man-Son-Hing M., O'Conner A.M., Drake E., Biggs J., Hum V., Laupacis A. The effect of qualitative vs. quantitative presentation of probability estimates on patient decision-making: a randomised trial. Health Expect 2002, 5:246-255.
48. Mason D., Prevost T., Sutton S. Perceptions of absolute versus relative differences between personal and comparison health risk. Health Psychol 2008, 27:87-92.
49. Misselbrook D., Armstrong D. Patients' responses to risk information about the benefits of treating hypertension. Br J Gen Pract 2001, 51:276-279.
50. Scott L.B., Curbow B. The effect of message frames and CVD risk factors on behavioural outcomes. Am J Health Behav 2006, 30:582-597.
51. Sorensen L., Gyrd-Hansen D., Kristiansen I.S., Nexoe J., Nielsen J.B. Laypersons' understanding of relative risk reductions: randomised cross-sectional study. BMC Med Inform Decis Making 2008, 8.
52. Stovring H., Gyrd-Hansen D., Kristiansen I.S., Nexoe J., Nielsen J.B. Communicating effectiveness of intervention for chronic diseases: what single format can replace comprehensive information?. BMC Med Inform Decis Making 2008, 8.
53. Goldman R.E., Parker D.R., Eaton C.B., Borkan J.M., Gramling R., Cover R.T., et al. Patients' perceptions of cholesterol, cardiovascular disease risk, and risk communication strategies. Ann Fam Med 2006, 4:205-371.
54. Gigerenzer G., Hoffrager U. How to improve Baysian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychol Rev 1995, 102:684-704.
55. Cranney M., Walley T. Same information, different decisions: the influence of evidence on the management of hypertension in the elderly. Br J Gen Pract 1996, 46:661-663.
56. Fagerlin A., Zikmund-Fisher B., PA U. If I'm better than average, then I'm ok?": comparative information influences beliefs about risk and benefits. Patient Educ Counsel 2007, 69:140-144.
57. Zikmund-Fisher B., Fagerlin A., Ubel P. What's time got to do with it? Inattention to duration in interpretation of survival graphs. Risk Anal 2005, 25:589-595.
58. Kassam K.S., Gilbert D.T., Boston A., Wilson T.D. Future anhedonia and time discounting. J Exp Soc Psychol 2008, 44:1533-1537.
59. Edwards A., Elwyn G. How should effectiveness of risk communication to aid patients' decisions be judged? A review of the literature. Med Decis Making 1999, 19:428-434.