Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Despite cataract surgery being a safe procedure with a low incidence of perioperative complications rates, poor knowledge, concerns about the effectiveness of treatment and cost-benefit analysis of the procedure significantly hinder cataract surgery uptake rates in Africa. This study describes the effect of a decision aid on knowledge and decision conflict on cataract patients in Africa.
METHODS: 120 patients with cataracts reporting to a tertiary hospital in Ghana were randomly assigned to receive a decision aid containing information on the possible outcomes of cataract surgery or a control booklet containing general knowledge about cataracts without information about cataract surgery. The primary outcome measured was the effect of the decision aid on their knowledge of cataract surgery. A score greater than 6/12 (50%) was deemed adequate knowledge. The secondary outcome was the decision conflict experienced by the participants assessed using the Decision Conflict Scale.
RESULTS: Compared to the control group, the participants in the intervention group scored higher marks across all sections of the questionnaire (2.92 vs 2.7, p = 0.042 in section \"Background\"; 2.62 vs 1.77, p < 0.001 in section \"Materials\"; 1.87 vs 1.55, p = 0.03 in section \"Results\"). The average total score was higher in the intervention group than in the control (36.7% difference; p < 0.001). Participants in the intervention group also demonstrated lower decision conflict scores than those in the control group (13.00 vs 37.17; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The decision aid increased knowledge of cataract surgery and reduced decision conflict among patients in a developing country.
METHODS: 120 patients with cataracts reporting to a tertiary hospital in Ghana were randomly assigned to receive a decision aid containing information on the possible outcomes of cataract surgery or a control booklet containing general knowledge about cataracts without information about cataract surgery. The primary outcome measured was the effect of the decision aid on their knowledge of cataract surgery. A score greater than 6/12 (50%) was deemed adequate knowledge. The secondary outcome was the decision conflict experienced by the participants assessed using the Decision Conflict Scale.
RESULTS: Compared to the control group, the participants in the intervention group scored higher marks across all sections of the questionnaire (2.92 vs 2.7, p = 0.042 in section \"Background\"; 2.62 vs 1.77, p < 0.001 in section \"Materials\"; 1.87 vs 1.55, p = 0.03 in section \"Results\"). The average total score was higher in the intervention group than in the control (36.7% difference; p < 0.001). Participants in the intervention group also demonstrated lower decision conflict scores than those in the control group (13.00 vs 37.17; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The decision aid increased knowledge of cataract surgery and reduced decision conflict among patients in a developing country.
摘要：
背景：尽管白内障手术是一种安全的手术，围手术期并发症发生率低，知识贫乏,对治疗有效性和手术成本效益分析的担忧显著阻碍了非洲白内障手术的吸收率。这项研究描述了决策辅助对非洲白内障患者知识和决策冲突的影响。
方法：120名在加纳一家三级医院报告的白内障患者被随机分配接受包含白内障手术可能结果信息的决策援助，或包含白内障一般知识但不包含白内障手术信息的对照手册。测量的主要结果是决策辅助对他们白内障手术知识的影响。分数大于6/12（50％）被认为是足够的知识。次要结果是使用决策冲突量表评估的参与者所经历的决策冲突。
结果：与对照组相比，干预组参与者在问卷的所有部分中得分较高(“背景”部分为2.92vs2.7,p=0.042;“材料”部分为2.62vs1.77,p<0.001;“结果”部分为1.87vs1.55,p=0.03)。干预组的平均总分高于对照组（36.7％，p<0.001）。干预组参与者的决策冲突得分也低于对照组(13.00vs37.17;p<0.001)。
结论：决策帮助增加了对白内障手术的了解，并减少了发展中国家患者之间的决策冲突。
方法：120名在加纳一家三级医院报告的白内障患者被随机分配接受包含白内障手术可能结果信息的决策援助，或包含白内障一般知识但不包含白内障手术信息的对照手册。测量的主要结果是决策辅助对他们白内障手术知识的影响。分数大于6/12（50％）被认为是足够的知识。次要结果是使用决策冲突量表评估的参与者所经历的决策冲突。
结果：与对照组相比，干预组参与者在问卷的所有部分中得分较高(“背景”部分为2.92vs2.7,p=0.042;“材料”部分为2.62vs1.77,p<0.001;“结果”部分为1.87vs1.55,p=0.03)。干预组的平均总分高于对照组（36.7％，p<0.001）。干预组参与者的决策冲突得分也低于对照组(13.00vs37.17;p<0.001)。
结论：决策帮助增加了对白内障手术的了解，并减少了发展中国家患者之间的决策冲突。
