Effectiveness of a Computerized Decision Aid in Primary Care on Decision Making and Quality of Life in Menorrhagia: Results of the MENTIP Randomized Controlled Trial

Joanne Protheroe, Peter Bower, Carolyn Chew‐Graham, T. J. Peters, Tom Fahey
In: Medical Decision Making · 2007 · vol. 27(5) , pp. 575–584 · doi:10.1177/0272989x07306785 · PMID:17898242 · W2098777285
article OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 4 in-corpus citations
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-08 ⓘ

A computerized decision aid, in addition to written information, reduced decisional conflict, improved knowledge, and enhanced quality of life for women with menorrhagia in primary care.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Computerized decision aids have the potential to increase patient involvement in the decision-making process. However, most published evidence concerning the effectiveness of decision aids is from secondary care. AIM: To evaluate whether the addition of a computerized decision aid to written information improves decision making in women consulting their general practitioner with menorrhagia compared with written information alone. DESIGN: of study. Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Nineteen general practices in the North of England. METHOD: One hundred forty-nine women presenting with menorrhagia were randomized to receive written information and access to a computerized decision aid or written information alone. Outcomes were assessed using postal questionnaires. These were scores on the Decisional Conflict Scale and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory anxiety scale at 2 weeks and the Menorrhagia Specific Utility quality-of-life scale, knowledge about menorrhagia, and anxiety and process measures at 6 months. RESULTS: Two weeks after the intervention, there was significantly less decisional conflict in the intervention group (adjusted difference = -16.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -21.5 to -11.7; P < 0.001). At 6 months, the intervention group showed better knowledge about menorrhagia (adjusted difference = 9.3 ; 95% CI = 1.9 to 16.6; P = 0.014) and menorrhagia quality of life (adjusted difference = 10.9; 95% CI = 0.9 to 21.0; P = 0.033). There was no difference in anxiety scores at either 2 weeks or 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: A computerized decision aid, used outside of the primary care consultation, is effective in increasing patient involvement in decision making in primary care.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cited by (4)

References (25)

Cited by (4)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-05-10T11:16:08.201468+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-09-01T06:29:04.589233+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK