Does a strategy to promote shared decision-making reduce medical practice variation in the choice of either single or double embryo transfer after in vitro fertilisation? A secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open

Volumn 6, Issue 5, 2016, Pages

  Brabers, Anne E M ^a   Van Dijk, Liset ^a   Groenewegen, Peter P ^a,b   Van Peperstraten, Arno M ^c   De Jong, Judith D ^a  

^a NETHERLANDS INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; CONTROL GROUP; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; EMBRYO; EXPLORATORY RESEARCH; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL PRACTICE; NETHERLANDS; NURSE; PATIENT PREFERENCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REGISTRATION; REIMBURSEMENT; SECONDARY ANALYSIS; SINGLE EMBRYO TRANSFER; ADULT; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COST; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ECONOMICS; EMBRYO TRANSFER; EPIDEMIOLOGY; IN VITRO FERTILIZATION; MULTICENTER STUDY; PREGNANCY; PREPREGNANCY CARE; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOLOGY; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ADULT; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMANS; NETHERLANDS; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PRACTICE PATTERNS, PHYSICIANS'; PRECONCEPTION CARE; PREGNANCY;

EID: 84971310852     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010894     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Paul-Shaheen P, Clark JD, Williams D. Small area analysis: a review and analysis of the North American literature. J Health Polit Policy Law 1987;12:741-809.
2. Wennberg JE. Understanding geographic variations in health care delivery. N Engl J Med 1999;340:52-3.
3. Wennberg JE. Tracking medicine: a researcher's quest to understand health care. Oxford University Press, 2010.
4. Corallo AN, Croxford R, Goodman DC, et al. A systematic review of medical practice variation in OECD countries. Health Policy 2014;114:5-14.
5. Emanuel EJ, Emanuel LL. Four models of the physician-patient relationship. JAMA 1992;267:2221-6.
6. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sci Med 1997;44:681-92.
7. Wennberg JE. Unwarranted variations in healthcare delivery: implications for academic medical centres. BMJ 2002;325:961.
8. McPherson K. Why do variations occur? In: Andersen TF, Mooney G, eds. The challenges of medical practice variations. London: The Macmillan Press, 1990:16-35.
9. Wennberg JE, Gittelsohn A. Health care delivery in Maine I: patterns of use of common surgical procedures. J Maine Med Assoc 1975;66:123-30, 149.
10. Mercuri M, Gafni A. Medical practice variations: what the literature tells us (or does not) about what are warranted and unwarranted variations. J Eval Clin Pract 2011;17:671-7.
11. De Jong JD, Groenewegen PP, Westert GP. Sociological model for understanding medical practice variations. In: Sobolev B, (Series ed) Johnson A, Stukel T, eds. Health services research series medical practice variations. New York: Springer, 2015:1-15.
12. Chassin MR. Explaining geographic variations. The enthusiasm hypothesis. Med Care 1993;31(5 Suppl):Ys37-44.
13. De Jong JD. Explaining medical practice variation. Social organization and institutional mechanisms. NIVEL, 2008.
14. Westert GP, Groenewegen PP. Medical practice variations: changing the theoretical approach. Scand J Public Health 1999;27:173-80.
15. van de Bovenkamp HM, Trappenburg MJ, Grit KJ. Patient participation in collective healthcare decision making: the Dutch model. Health Expect 2010;13:73-85.
16. Guadagnoli E, Ward P. Patient participation in decision-making. Soc Sci Med 1998;47:329-39.
17. Frosch DL, Kaplan RM. Shared decision making in clinical medicine: past research and future directions. Am J Prev Med 1999;17:285-94.
18. Fraenkel L. Incorporating patients' preferences into medical decision making. Med Care Res Rev 2013;70(1 Suppl):80s-93s.
19. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. National Academies Press, 2001.
20. Wennberg JE. Variation in use of Medicare services among regions and selected academic medical centers: is more better? Commonwealth Fund, 2005.
21. Greer AL, Goodwin JS, Freeman JL, et al. Bringing the patient back in. Guidelines, practice variations, and the social context of medical practice. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2002;18:747-61.
22. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model. Soc Sci Med 1999;49:651-61.
23. O'Connor AM, Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Flood AB. Modifying unwarranted variations in health care: shared decision making using patient decision aids. Health Aff (Millwood) 2004;SupplVariation:VAR63-72.
24. Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, et al. Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice. J Gen Intern Med 2012;27:1361-7.
25. Elwyn G, Laitner S, Coulter A, et al. Implementing shared decision making in the NHS. BMJ 2010;341:c5146.
26. Stacey D, Bennett CL, Barry MJ, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011(10):Cd001431.
27. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Weinstein J, et al. Involving patients in clinical decisions: impact of an interactive video program on use of back surgery. Med Care 2000;38:959-69.
28. McClure W. Toward development and application of a qualitative theory of hospital utilization. Inquiry 1982;19:117-35.
29. O'Connor AM, Wennberg JE, Legare F, et al. Toward the 'tipping point': decision aids and informed patient choice. Health Aff (Millwood) 2007;26:716-25.
30. Stiggelbout AM, Van der Weijden T, De Wit MP, et al. Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare. BMJ 2012;344:e256.
31. Weinstein JN, Bronner KK, Morgan TS, et al. Trends and geographic variations in major surgery for degenerative diseases of the hip, knee, and spine. Health Aff (Millwood) 2004;Suppl Variation:Var81-9.
32. van Peperstraten A, Nelen W, Grol R, et al. The effect of a multifaceted empowerment strategy on decision making about the number of embryos transferred in in vitro fertilisation: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2010;341:c2501.
33. Pandian Z, Marjoribanks J, Ozturk O, et al. Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;7:Cd003416.
34. Pinborg A. IVF/ICSI twin pregnancies: risks and prevention. Hum Reprod Update 2005;11:575-93.
35. Andersen AN, Goossens V, Ferraretti AP, et al. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2004: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod 2008;23:756-71.
36. de Mouzon J, Goossens V, Bhattacharya S, et al. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2006: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod 2010;25:1851-62.
37. Ferraretti AP, Goossens V, Kupka M, et al. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2009: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod 2013;28:2318-31.
38. van Peperstraten A. Implementation of single embryo transfer: a patient directed strategy. Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, 2009.
39. Van Peperstraten AM, Kreuwel IA, Hermens RP, et al. Determinants of the choice for single or double embryo transfer in twin prone couples. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008;87:226-31.
40. Barry MJ. Shared decision making: informing and involving patients to do the right thing in health care. J Ambul Care Manage 2012;35:90-8.
41. Dartmouth Atlas. A Dartmouth Atlas project topic brief preference-sensitive care. Lebanon: The Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care, 2007.
42. Westert GP, Groenewegen PP, Lindenberg SM. De invloed van ziekenhuispatiënten op de duur van de hospitalisatie. TSG 1991;69:184-94.
43. Hajjaj FM, Salek MS, Basra MK, et al. Non-clinical influences on clinical decision-making: a major challenge to evidence-based practice. J R Soc Med 2010;103:178-87.
44. Kreuwel IA, van Peperstraten AM, Hulscher ME, et al. Evaluation of an effective multifaceted implementation strategy for elective single-embryo transfer after in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 2013;28:336-42.
45. [No authors listed]. Prevention of twin pregnancies after IVF/ICSI by single embryo transfer. ESHRE Campus Course Report. Hum Reprod 2001;16:790-800.
46. Wolner-Hanssen P, Rydhstroem H. Cost-effectiveness analysis of in-vitro fertilization: estimated costs per successful pregnancy after transfer of one or two embryos. Hum Reprod 1998;13:88-94.
47. Lukassen HG, Schönbeck Y, Adang EM, et al. Cost analysis of singleton versus twin pregnancies after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2004;81:1240-6.
48. van Peperstraten AM, Hermens RP, Nelen WL, et al. Deciding how many embryos to transfer after in vitro fertilisation: development and pilot test of a decision aid. Patient Educ Couns 2010;78:124-9.
49. Elwyn G, O'Connor A, Stacey D, et al. Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process. BMJ 2006;333:417.