Assessing patient information and decision-support needs in problematic alcohol use and co-occurring depression to inform shared decision-making interventions

Comparison of analog and digital patient decision aids for the treatment of depression: a scoping review

Introduction

Patient decision aids (PDAs) are important tools to empower patients and integrate their preferences and values in the decision-making process. Even though patients with mental health problems have a strong interest in being more involved in decision making about their treatment, research has mainly focused on PDAs for somatic conditions. In this scoping review, we focus on patients suffering from depression and the role of PDAs for this patient group. The review offers an overview of digital and analog PDAs, their advantages and disadvantages as well as recommendations for further research and development.

Methods

A systematic search of the existing literature guided by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses - extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) was conducted. Three electronic literature databases with the appropriate thematic focus were searched (PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science). The search strategy used controlled and natural language to search for the key concepts decision aids and depression. The articles were selected in a two-step process guided by predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. We narratively synthetized information extracted from 40 research articles.

Results

We included 40 articles in our review. Our review revealed that there is more focus on digital PDAs in research than in clinical practice. Digitalization can enhance the benefits of PDAs by developing tools that are more efficient, interactive, and personalized. The main disadvantages of both types of PDAs for the treatment of depression are related to time, dissemination, and capacity building for the health care providers. Digital PDAs need to be regularly updated, effective strategies for their dissemination and acceptance need to be identified, and clinicians need sufficient training on how to use digital PDAs. There is more research needed to study which forms of PDAs are most appropriate for various patient groups (e.g., older adults, or patients with comorbidities), and to identify the most effective ways of PDAs' integration in the clinical workflow. The findings from our review could be well aligned with the International Patient Decision Aids Standards.

Discussion

More research is needed regarding effective strategies for the implementation of digital PDAs into the clinical workflow, ethical issues raised by the digital format, and opportunities of tailoring PDAs for diverse patient groups.

Iteration is not solving the opioid crisis, it's time for transformation

Opioid use disorder (OUD) produces exceedingly high rates of morbidity and mortality in the United States and throughout the world. Almost 90% of persons qualifying for treatment do not enter treatment and 72% of those who initiate treatment leave within 60 days. This Perspective posits that over the past decade our OUD treatment system has produced only small iterative gains in treatment access because, in part, it is founded in a series of top-down regulatory policies dating back more than 100 years. These policies prioritized restricting persons with OUD from having access to opioid agonists over empirical discovery of treatment best practice. It further suggests that for persons who are not already responding positively to our existing treatments, we may need to fundamentally transform care to enact true, meaningful change. Four potential considerations are outlined: expanding beyond long-acting opioids for treatment, embracing safe use as a viable therapeutic target, ending closed medication distribution systems, and partnering with our patients. The overarching aim of this discussion is to motivate broader thinking about new solutions for the patients for whom the existing strategies are not working and who may benefit from more transformative approaches. Though efforts to-date to expand existing treatment systems and find new ways to promote existing MOUDs have been important, these efforts have represented iterative changes. For us to meet our goal of substantially reducing opioid-related harms, it may be time to consider strategies that represent true transformation.

Development and pilot of the Alcohol and Depression Decision-Aid for Psychological Treatments (ADDAPT)

Purpose

Evidence is lacking as to the superiority of dual-focused versus single-focused approaches in treating depression and alcohol use comorbidity. Different people may also value the different features of treatment options differently, necessitating a decision-support tool. This study aims to test the acceptability, feasibility, safety and potential usefulness of the Alcohol and Depression Decision-Aid for Psychological Treatments (ADDAPT).

Design/methodology/approach

ADDAPT was developed according to International Patient Decision-Aid Standards and in consultation with potential end users. Adults with depression and alcohol use comorbidity, who were considering/recently considered psychological treatments, were recruited via online advertisements. After clicking on the study URL, participants accessed the ADDAPT e-book and completed validated and purpose-designed questionnaires.

Findings

Of the 24 participants, most would recommend ADDAPT to others (79.2% agree) and endorsed it as easy-to-use (75%), useful in decision-making (79.2%), presenting balanced (87.5%), up-to-date (91.7%), easy-to-understand (79.2%) and trustworthy information (83.3%), which did not provoke anxiety (i.e. safety; 75%). Post-use, participants felt well prepared to decide on treatment (M = 3.48/5) and demonstrated good treatment knowledge (M = 65.83%). All but one participant indicated a treatment choice supported by best available evidence, and decisional conflict scores except for the uncertainty subscale were below the threshold for decisional delay (all M < 37.5/100).

Originality/value

ADDAPT is the first decision-aid of its kind, with pilot findings supporting its acceptability, feasibility, safety and potential usefulness for improving decision-making quality among people considering psychological treatment options for depression and alcohol use comorbidity.