Skip to main content

Table 4 Results for the continuous outcomes

From: Evaluation of a program for routine implementation of shared decision-making in cancer care: results of a stepped wedge cluster randomized trial

 

Observed data

Estimated values

Control condition

Intervention condition

ICC

aMD

(95% CI)

P

d

n

mean

(SD)

n

mean

(SD)

Patient survey measures a

 Uptake of SDM (SDM-Q-9) b

868

63.51

(26.40)

938

64.66

(26.87)

.026

0.56

(− 3.97 to 5.09)

.808

0.02

 Uptake of SDM (collaboRATE) c

954

83.07

(19.53)

1023

83.04

(18.91)

.018

1.23

(− 1.91 to 4.38)

.442

0.06

 Satisfaction d

992

3.40

(0.87)

1066

3.52

(0.74)

.006

0.09

(− 0.04 to 0.22)

.156

0.11

HCP survey measures e

 SDM knowledge f

279

3.53

(3.12)

273

6.21

(3.17)

.005

1.58

(0.61 to 2.54)

.002

0.50

 SDM uptake f

275

4.97

(2.65)

269

5.91

(2.49)

.035

0.37

(− 0.46 to 1.21)

.377

0.14

 SDM barriers (IcanSDM) g

281

4.50

(1.33)

272

4.46

(1.39)

.031

− 0.15

(− 0.59 to 0.30)

.521

0.11

 Attitude: Patients initiating their active involvement foster SDM f

280

7.47

(1.86)

271

7.56

(2.01)

.007

− 0.01

(− 0.62 to 0.60)

.976

− 0.01

 Attitude: Positive that SDM gains importance f

283

7.53

(1.76)

273

7.51

(1.97)

.027

0.07

(− 0.53 to 0.68)

.813

0.04

 Attitude: Colleagues have positive attitudes towards SDM f

282

6.22

(2.09)

271

6.15

(2.00)

.042

− 0.10

(− 0.76 to 0.56)

.766

− 0.02

 Attitude: SDM is helpful in my routine care for patients f

282

6.79

(1.73)

271

6.60

(2.04)

.009

− 0.35

(− 0.95 to 0.25)

.247

− 0.07

 Attitude: SDM improves patient care f

280

7.16

(1.88)

270

6.96

(2.05)

.015

− 0.13

(− 0.76 to 0.49)

.679

− 0.02

 Attitude: Clinical experience more important than patient preferences f

276

3.35

(2.40)

268

3.57

(2.38)

.007

0.09

(− 0.66 to 0.84)

.810

− 0.03

 Organizational readiness for implementing SDM (ORIC) h

279

3.44

(0.67)

272

3.43

(0.65)

.098

− 0.04

(− 0.25 to 0.18)

.731

− 0.06

 Change commitment (ORIC subscale) h

279

3.48

(0.71)

272

3.45

(0.70)

.089

− 0.06

(− 0.29 to 0.17)

.592

− 0.09

 Change efficacy (ORIC subscale) h

279

3.41

(0.70)

271

3.40

(0.70)

.081

− 0.02

(− 0.24 to 0.21)

.880

− 0.03

Observer-rated audio recordings i

 Uptake of SDM (OPTION5) b

69

21.30

(12.44)

63

16.71

(15.35)

.168

− 0.35

(− 8.26 to 7.57)

.931

− 0.03

  1. Notes. n number of observations, SD standard deviation, ICC intraclass correlation coefficient, aMD adjusted mean difference, CI confidence interval, P P-value of the adjusted mean difference (intervention effect estimate), d Cohen’s d (pooled so that positive values indicate superiority of the intervention), HCP health care professional, SDM shared decision-making, ORIC Organizational Readiness for Implementing Change, VAS visual analog scale
  2. aanalyses adjusted for wave, gender, time since diagnosis, reason for visit, decision topic, protocol compliance of diagnostic status, protocol compliance of days since the rated consultation, protocol compliance of age, protocol compliance of the time point of answering, and pandemic situation
  3. bsum scores, 0–100, higher values indicate more SDM
  4. csum scores, 1–100, higher values indicate more SDM
  5. d1–4, higher values indicate higher satisfaction
  6. eanalyses adjusted for wave, protocol compliance of the time point of answering, and pandemic situation
  7. fvisual analog scale, 0–10, higher values indicate more knowledge/SDM/agreement with attitude
  8. g0–10, higher values indicate stronger barriers
  9. h1–5, higher values indicate more organizational readiness/commitment/efficacy
  10. ianalyses adjusted for wave, sex, time since diagnosis, occupational status, protocol compliance of diagnostic status, appropriateness of the recording for rating, and pandemic situation
Back to article page

Implementation Science

ISSN: 1748-5908