Development and field testing of a decision aid to facilitate shared decision making for adults newly diagnosed with attention‐deficit hyperactivity disorder

• Published in: Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy Vol. 25; no. 1; pp. 366 - 373
• Main Authors: Aoki, Yumi, Tsuboi, Takashi, Takaesu, Yoshikazu, Watanabe, Koichiro, Nakayama, Kazuhiro, Kinoshita, Yasuhito, Kayama, Mami
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.02.2022; John Wiley and Sons Inc; Wiley
• Subjects: Adult; Adults; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity - diagnosis; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity - therapy; Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; Clinical decision making; Clinical standards; Coping strategies; Criteria; decision aid; Decision Making; Decision Making, Shared; Decision Support Techniques; Drug therapy; Field study; Group decision making; Humans; Hyperactivity; Knowledge; Medical diagnosis; Medical personnel; Mental disorders; Mental health; Newly diagnosed; Original; Patients; pre–post test; Prototypes; Questionnaires; shared decision making; treatment decision making; Treatment methods; Japan; attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder; shared decision making; treatment decision making; pre-post test; decision aid
• ISSN: 1369-6513; 1369-7625
• DOI: 10.1111/hex.13393

Background The number of individuals who are diagnosed with attention‐deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) during adulthood has increased in recent years. However, there is still no decision aid (DA) to help adults newly diagnosed with ADHD make decisions regarding further treatments. Objective This study aimed to describe the development process of a DA for adults newly diagnosed with ADHD and its field testing during the shared decision‐making (SDM) process in a clinical setting. Methods The development process involved the creation of a DA prototype using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards criteria and revision of the prototype through the stakeholders' reviews. The field testing of the DA compared scores before and after the SDM process on the service users' knowledge scale, decisional conflict scale and the Conners Adult ADHD Rating Scales. Results The developed DA contained options of watchful waiting with own coping skills and pharmacological treatment, which consisted of several kinds of drug options. Fifteen adults newly diagnosed with ADHD participated in the field testing. The participant decision‐making quality outcomes such as their knowledge and decisional conflict improved after the SDM process. ADHD severity did not change. Conclusion A DA for adults with ADHD was systematically developed following the international criteria. Field testing indicated that the DA could serve as a tool to facilitate the SDM process. Further research on this DA is necessary before its routine implementation. Patient or Public Contribution During the development process of the DA, the service users who had already been diagnosed with ADHD reviewed the DA prototype and provided feedback, which improved the final version of the DA.