Shared decision making: examining key elements and barriers to adoption into routine clinical practice

Evidence-based practice and patient-centered care: Doing both well

BACKGROUND

Health care organizations increasingly strive to deliver care that is both evidence based and patient centered. Although often complementary, fundamental contradictions may exist between these goals, and the organizational culture and infrastructure necessary to be successful in one domain may inherently diminish performance in the other.

PURPOSE

We assessed the relationship between evidence-based practice (EBP) and patient-centered care (PCC) by seeking to identify specific behavioral and process mechanisms, along with organizational characteristics that distinguish medical centers that are able to provide inpatient care that is both evidence based and patient centered from those where performance is either mixed or low in both domains.

METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

We analyzed interview data from 142 employees at 12 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers selected based on EBP and PCC performance (high, low, or mixed) using a priori constructs consistent with organizational literature, as well as emergent themes.

RESULTS

We confirmed that tensions may arise when attempting to deliver both EBP and PCC and found unique characteristics of organizations that do both well. High-performing sites exhibited organizational cultures of empowerment where both EBP and PCC expectations were emphasized; provided formal and informal institutional supports and structures with regard to PCC and EBP; and fostered multidisciplinary, multidirectional approaches to care and communication that facilitated delivery of both EBP and PCC.

CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Organizations that excel in providing both EBP and PCC exhibit unique characteristics and processes. Recognizing that some characteristics such as culture are difficult to change, these findings nonetheless highlight areas that could be enhanced by medical centers striving to deliver care that is both evidence based and patient centered.

Parental Decision-Making in Pediatric Intensive Care: A Concept Analysis

The development of nursing knowledge requires a close relationship between theory, research, and practice. The purpose of the analysis of the concept of "parental decision-making in pediatric critical care" is to facilitate nurses' therapeutic care of critically ill children and their families. To construct, structure, and give meaning to the concept, we use our experience in the field, critical reading of the literature, and careful analysis of data that have emerged about parental decision-making in pediatric intensive care. Several factors affect parent's ability to act as decision-makers: the psychosocial and physical disorders they develop, the subordination of their parental roles by the health care team, and the child's critical state of health. While different disciplines, including nursing, have well described the decision-making concept, parental decision-making in the context of pediatric intensive care has not been as well delineated. Nursing science recognizes the importance of decision-making and has incorporated the concept as an essential domain of its philosophical and disciplinary interests. Following the method proposed by Walker and Avant, the concept was analyzed, attributes, background, and consequences described. A model case was presented and discussed. An operational definition emerges, providing knowledge for professional nursing practice and will be the basis for an essential theoretical development around this phenomenon. Parents' recognition, the promotion of family-centered care, and shared decisions are ideal for encouraging parental participation.

Supporting Communication of Shared Decision-Making Principles in US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations

Aims. This methods project was conducted to support the US Preventive Services Task Force’s (USPSTF) consideration of how information pertinent to shared decision making (SDM) can be best communicated in its recommendations. Methods. The project included a literature scan to identify SDM frameworks, audit of six USPSTF recommendations to judge the completeness of SDM communication, input from eight SDM experts on the most helpful SDM guidance to provide in USPSTF recommendations, and review of USPSTF recommendations and evidence reports to establish criteria for identifying topics that would most benefit from additional communication resources. Results. We identified eight SDM frameworks and selected one to guide the audit of USPSTF recommendations. All six recommendations include SDM elements related to the patient’s role in decision making, preventive service being considered, pros and cons of options, uncertainties about benefits and harms, and importance of patient preferences. Two SDM elements are not routinely communicated in the recommendations—identification of not screening or initiating preventive medication as an alternative and the importance of patient understanding of options. Experts offered suggestions for essential SDM elements to address, such as assessing decisional conflict to measure patient uncertainty in choosing an option and highlighting uncertainty in estimates of benefit and harm, credibility of the evidence base, precision of estimates, and applicability to the individual patient. We developed six criteria for selection of USPSTF recommendations to supplement with a communication resource. Conclusions. The findings of this project can assist the USPSTF and other clinical guideline developers in incorporating SDM information in recommendations and determining which topics would most benefit from additional communication resources to support clinicians in engaging patients in SDM.

The impact of shared decision making on time consumption and clinical decisions. A prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Concerns of increased time consumption and of the impact on clinical decisions may restrain doctors from shared decision making (SDM). This paper evaluates consultation length and decisions made when using an in-consult patient decision aid (PtDA).

METHODS

This prospective cohort study compared an unexposed cohort with a cohort exposed to SDM and a PtDA in two preference-sensitive decision situations: invasive lung cancer diagnostics and adjuvant treatment for early breast cancer. Outcome measures were consultation length and decisions made.

RESULTS

The study included 261 consultations, 115 were in the SDM-exposed cohort. Consultations were inconsiderably longer in the SDM cohort; 2 min, 11 s (p = 0.2217) for lung cancer diagnostics and 3 min, 57 s (p = 0.1128) for adjuvant breast cancer treatment. In lung cancer diagnostics, consultation length became more uniform and decisions tended to become conservative after introduction of SDM. For adjuvant breast cancer, slightly more patients in the SDM cohort chose to decline treatment.

CONCLUSION

Shared decision making did not take significantly longer time and led to slightly more conservative decisions.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

SDM may be implemented without considerable impact on consultation length. The impact on clinical decisions depends mainly on the clinical situation.

A Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) study of medication and CBT sequencing in the treatment of pediatric anxiety disorders

BACKGROUND

Treatment of a child who has an anxiety disorder usually begins with the question of which treatment to start first, medication or psychotherapy. Both have strong empirical support, but few studies have compared their effectiveness head-to-head, and none has investigated what to do if the treatment tried first isn't working well-whether to optimize the treatment already begun or to add the other treatment.

METHODS

This is a single-blind Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) of 24 weeks duration with two levels of randomization, one in each of two 12-week stages. In Stage 1, children will be randomized to fluoxetine or Coping Cat Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). In Stage 2, remitters will continue maintenance-level therapy with the single-modality treatment received in Stage 1. Non-remitters during the first 12 weeks of treatment will be randomized to either [1] optimization of their Stage 1 treatment, or [2] optimization of Stage 1 treatment and addition of the other intervention. After the 24-week trial, we will follow participants during open, naturalistic treatment to assess the durability of study treatment effects. Patients, 8-17 years of age who are diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, will be recruited and treated within 9 large clinical sites throughout greater Los Angeles. They will be predominantly underserved, ethnic minorities. The primary outcome measure will be the self-report score on the 41-item youth SCARED (Screen for Child Anxiety Related Disorders). An intent-to-treat analysis will compare youth randomized to fluoxetine first versus those randomized to CBT first ("Main Effect 1"). Then, among Stage 1 non-remitters, we will compare non-remitters randomized to optimization of their Stage 1 monotherapy versus non-remitters randomized to combination treatment ("Main Effect 2"). The interaction of these main effects will assess whether one of the 4 treatment sequences (CBT➔CBT; CBT➔med; med➔med; med➔CBT) in non-remitters is significantly better or worse than predicted from main effects alone.

DISCUSSION

Findings from this SMART study will identify treatment sequences that optimize outcomes in ethnically diverse pediatric patients from underserved low- and middle-income households who have anxiety disorders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This protocol, version 1.0, was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on February 17, 2021 with Identifier: NCT04760275 .

Evaluating the clinical utility of early exome sequencing in diverse pediatric outpatient populations in the North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation of Next-generation Exome Sequencing (NCGENES) 2 study: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Exome sequencing (ES) has probable utility for shortening the diagnostic odyssey of children with suspected genetic disorders. This report describes the design and methods of a study evaluating the potential of ES as a routine clinical tool for pediatric patients who have suspected genetic conditions and who are in the early stages of the diagnostic odyssey.

METHODS

The North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation by Next-generation Exome Sequencing (NCGENES) 2 study is an interdisciplinary, multi-site Phase III randomized controlled trial of two interventions: educational pre-visit preparation (PVP) and offer of first-line ES. In this full-factorial design, parent-child dyads are randomly assigned to one of four study arms (PVP + usual care, ES + usual care, PVP + ES + usual care, or usual care alone) in equal proportions. Participants are recruited from Pediatric Genetics or Neurology outpatient clinics in three North Carolina healthcare facilities. Eligible pediatric participants are < 16 years old and have a first visit to a participating clinic, a suspected genetic condition, and an eligible parent/guardian to attend the clinic visit and complete study measures. The study oversamples participants from underserved and under-represented populations. Participants assigned to the PVP arms receive an educational booklet and question prompt list before clinical interactions. Randomization to offer of first-line ES is revealed after a child's clinic visit. Parents complete measures at baseline, pre-clinic, post-clinic, and two follow-up timepoints. Study clinicians provide phenotypic data and complete measures after the clinic visit and after returning results. Reportable study-related research ES results are confirmed in a CLIA-certified clinical laboratory. Results are disclosed to the parent by the clinical team. A community consultation team contributed to the development of study materials and study implementation methods and remains engaged in the project.

DISCUSSION

NCGENES 2 will contribute valuable knowledge concerning technical, clinical, psychosocial, and health economic issues associated with using early diagnostic ES to shorten the diagnostic odyssey of pediatric patients with likely genetic conditions. Results will inform efforts to engage diverse populations in genomic medicine research and generate evidence that can inform policy, practice, and future research related to the utility of first-line diagnostic ES in health care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03548779 . Registered on June 07, 2018.

Aspects of Medication and Patient participation-an Easy guideLine (AMPEL). A conversation guide increases patients' and physicians' satisfaction with prescription talks

Patients want more information and active participation in medical decisions. Information and active participation correlate with increased adherence. A conversation guide, combining patient-relevant drug information with steps of shared decision-making, was developed to support physicians in effective and efficient prescription talks. Six GP trainees in community-based primary care practices participated in a controlled pilot study in sequential pre-post design. Initially, they conducted 41 prescription talks as usual, i.e., without knowing the guide. Then, they conducted 23 talks considering the guide (post-intervention phase). Immediately after the respective talk, patients filled in a questionnaire on satisfaction with the information on medication and physician–patient interaction, and physicians about their satisfaction with the talk and the application of the guide. Patients felt better informed after guide-based prescription talks (e.g., SIMS-D in median 10 vs. 17, p < 0.05), more actively involved (KPF-A for patient activation 2.9 ± 0.8 vs. 3.6 ± 0.8, p < 0.05), and more satisfied with the physician–patient interaction. Physicians rated the guide helpful and feasible. Their satisfaction with the conversation was significantly enhanced during the post-intervention phase. The evaluation of the duration of the talk was not influenced. Enhanced patients’ and physicians’ satisfaction with prescription talks encourages further examinations of the conversation guide. We invite physicians to try our guide in everyday medical practice.

Perceived involvement in health care decisions among US adults: Sociodemographic and medical condition correlates

OBJECTIVE

To explore factors associated with how often US adults perceived that they were "always" involved in decisions about health care to the degree that they desired.

METHODS

We examined cross-sectional, nationally representative data from the 2018 Health Information National Trends Survey. There were 3504 responses in the full HINTS dataset; 2499 remained after eliminating respondents with missing data for any factor of interest. Sociodemographic factors included age, gender, race/ethnicity, and education. Medical conditions included diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, lung disease, arthritis, cancer, and depression. Participants were asked to think about communication with health professionals during the last 12 months and how often health professionals involved them in decisions about health care.

RESULTS

In univariate analyses, Asian and Hispanic race were associated with lower odds of always being involved in decisions about health care; whereas higher education and a history of cancer were associated with higher odds of "always" being involved in decisions about health care, p < 0.05. In multivariate analyses, race and education both remained significant; however, history of cancer did not.

CONCLUSION

Differences by race/ethnicity and educational attainment exist regarding perceived involvement in decisions about health care.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Findings may inform future shared decision making interventions.

Shared clinical decision-making experiences in nursing: a qualitative study

Background

Shared decision making (SDM) is a patient-centered nursing concept that emphasizes the autonomy of patients. SDM is a co-operative process that involves information exchange and communication between medical staff and patients for making treatment decisions. In this study, we explored the experiences of clinical nursing staff participating in SDM.

Methods

This study adopted a qualitative research design. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 21 nurses at a medical center in northern Taiwan. All interview recordings were transcribed verbatim. Content analysis was performed to analyze the data.

Results

The findings yielded the following three themes covering seven categories: knowledge regarding SDM, trigger discussion and coordination, and respect of sociocultural factors.

Conclusions

The results of this study describe the experiences of clinical nursing staff participating in SDM and can be used as a reference for nursing education and nursing administrative supervisors wishing to plan and enhance professional nursing SDM in nursing education.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12912-021-00597-0.

A survey of health care practitioners' attitudes toward shared decision-making for choice of next birth after cesarean

BACKGROUND

Patients with a history of cesarean may benefit from shared decision-making (SDM) interventions, such as patient decision aids, that provide individualized clinical information and help to clarify personal preferences. We sought to understand the factors that influence how care practitioners support choices for mode of birth and what individual and health system factors influence uptake of SDM in routine care.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of health care practitioners in British Columbia, Canada (2016-2017). Participants included family physicians, midwives, obstetricians, and registered nurses. We conducted descriptive and inferential analyses of quantitative data and subjected the open-ended survey responses to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Analysis of survey responses (n = 307) suggested there was no significant association between the size of the participant hospital and their medico-legal concerns about mode of birth. Environmental factors that may influence the use of SDM included the length of time it takes to initiate an emergency cesarean and the timing of when the SDM intervention is introduced to the patient. No participants reported protocols prohibiting VBAC at their hospital. Participants preferred an SDM approach where the pregnant person is involved in making the final decision for mode of birth.

CONCLUSIONS

Although maternity care practitioners express attitudes and behaviors that may support SDM for mode of birth after cesarean, implementing SDM using a patient decision aid alone may be challenging because of environmental factors. Our study demonstrates how survey data can aid in identifying how, when, where, for whom, and why an SDM intervention could be implemented.

Shared decision making in Australian physiotherapy practice: A survey of knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported use

Objective

To assess Australian physiotherapists’ knowledge about, attitudes towards, and self-reported use of shared decision making, as well as perceived barriers to its implementation in practice.

Methods

Physiotherapists registered for a national Australian physiotherapy conference were invited via email and the conference app to complete a self-administered online questionnaire about shared decision making, including: a) knowledge, b) attitude to and reported approach in practice, c) behaviours used, d) barriers, e) previous training and future training interest. Responses were analysed descriptively and open-ended questions synthesised narratively.

Results

372 physiotherapists (71% female, mean age 45 years, mean experience 23 years) completed the survey. Respondents had a good level of knowledge on most questions, with correct responses ranging from 39.5% to 98.5% of participants, and a generally positive attitude towards shared decision making, believing it useful to most practice areas. Sixty percent indicated they make decisions with their patients and there was general agreement between how decisions should be made and how they are actually made. The behaviour with the lowest reported occurrence was explaining the relevant research evidence about the benefits and harms of the options. The main perceived barriers were patient knowledge and confidence, consequent fewer physiotherapy sessions, and time constraints. Most (79%) were keen to learn more about shared decision making.

Conclusions

Shared decision making is of growing importance to all health professions and rarely studied in physical therapy. This sample of Australian physiotherapists had a generally positive attitude to shared decision making and learning more about it. Opportunities for providing such skills training at the undergraduate level and in continuing professional development should be explored. This training should ensure that the communicating evidence component of shared decision making is addressed as well as debunking myths about perceived barriers to its implementation.

The Mediating Role of Shared Decision-Making in the Effect of the Patient-Physician Relationship on Compliance With Treatment

Background:

For a successful treatment outcome, the components of the treatment process are very important. The patient–physician relationship plays a key role in the successful therapeutic process and effective health service delivery. The patient’s compliance with the treatment directly affects the success of the treatment.

Objective:

This study aims to determine the effect of the patient–physician relationship on compliance with the treatment and to determine whether shared decision-making has an mediating role in this effect.

Patient Involvement:

Most of the study participants (55%) were younger than 35 and their average age was 30. The majority of the participants have an associate degree or higher education.

Method:

The study used a 4-part survey form as the data collection tool. The sample in this study consisted of 399 participants. To analyze the obtained data, Structural Equation Modeling was used by employing the Smart PLS3 software.

Results:

The results of the study show that the patient–physician relationship positively affects the patient’s compliance with the treatment and shared decision-making. In addition, shared decision-making positively affects the patient’s compliance with the treatment. The effect of the patient–physician relationship on compliance with treatment was strengthened through shared decision-making.

Discussion:

The results of the study revealed that patient–physician relationship and shared decision-making are two important factors in patients’ compliance with the treatment. Accordingly, the stronger the patient–physician relationship and the more patients participate in their treatment decisions, the higher their compliance with the treatment.

The Envirome Web Service: Patient context at the point of care

Patient context - the "envirome" - can have a significant impact on patient health. While envirome indicators are available through large scale public data sources, they are not provided in a format that can be easily accessed and interpreted at the point of care by healthcare providers with limited time during a patient encounter. We developed a clinical decision support tool to bring envirome indicators to the point of care in a large pediatric hospital system in the Kansas City region. The Envirome Web Service (EWS) securely geocodes patient addresses in real time to link their records with publicly available context data. End-users guided the design of the EWS, which presents summaries of patient context data in the electronic health record (EHR) without disrupting the provider workflow. Through surveys, focus groups, and a formal review by hospital staff, the EWS was deployed into production use, integrating publicly available data on food access with the hospital EHR. Evaluation of EWS usage during the 2020 calendar year shows that 1,034 providers viewed the EWS, with a total of 29,165 sessions. This suggests that the EWS was successfully integrated with the EHR and is highly visible. The results also indicate that 63 (6.1%) of the providers are regular users that opt to maintain the EWS in their custom workflows, logging more than 100 EWS sessions during the year. The vendor agnostic design of the EWS supports interoperability and makes it accessible to health systems with disparate EHR vendors.

Learning shared decision-making in clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

To explore how shared decision-making (SDM) is learned in clinical practice according to professionals and patients.

METHODS

Focus group and individual interviews with interns (n = 9), residents (n = 12), senior physicians (n = 13), and (former) patients and relatives (n = 13) in fertility care and intensive care.

RESULTS

Patients and professionals identified barriers and drivers for SDM related to patient, caregiver, and context. Participants agreed: the nuances of SDM are learned in practice, not during undergraduate medical education. Through observing and copying from other professionals, interns and residents describe building their personal "repertoire" of SDM skills, knowledge, and attitude. Professionals indicated it was helpful to see many different examples - both good and bad - of physicians in action.

CONCLUSION

Learning SDM is a complicated task for both students and professionals in healthcare. Relevant factors are the involvement of patients, the role of informal learning processes and role models, and the importance of reflective practice.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Learning SDM in practice requires 1) measures to lessen pressures on a meso and macro level that hinder SDM in practice, 2) inventive and precise training and education and paying explicit attention to informal learning processes in clinical practice and learning through role models.

Using DEMATEL Technique to Identify the Key Success Factors of Shared Decision-Making Based on Influential Network Relationship Perspective

In the field of medicine, shared decision-making (SDM) is an important issue primarily aimed at resolving the problem of information asymmetry between clinicians and patients in the selection of treatment options and follow-up nursing plans. Most previous studies on this topic have focused on key elements and the development and implementation of SDM scales. This study used the decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) method to establish a network of influence relationships among factors that are keys to the success of the SDM process. Survey data were obtained from a well-known brain hospital in China. The key factors of success included tailor information, flexibility approach, check understanding patient, document (discussion about) decision, present evidence, make or explicitly defer decision, and patient values and preferences. We determined that clinicians should provide a series of treatment options and follow-up care plans based on a patientʼs conditions and preferences. Clinicians should also actively communicate with patients and their families to ensure a thorough understanding of the entire treatment and nursing process. This study also highlights the academic value of the cross-disciplinary integration of medical decision issues and multiple attribute decision-making methodologies.

Development of an Implementation Strategy for Patient Decision Aids in Rheumatoid Arthritis Through Application of the Behavior Change Wheel

OBJECTIVE

Decision aids are being developed to support guideline-based rheumatology care in Canada. The study objective was to identify barriers to decision aid use in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) within a behavior change model to inform an implementation strategy.

METHODS

Perspectives from Canadian health care providers (HCPs) and patients living with RA were obtained on an early RA decision aid and on perceived facilitators and barriers to decision aid implementation. Data were collected through semistructured interviews, transcribed, and then analyzed by inductive thematic analysis. The lessons learned were then mapped to the behavior change wheel COM-B system (C = capability, O = opportunity, and M = motivation interact to influence B = behavior) to inform key elements of a national implementation strategy.

RESULTS

Fifteen HCPs and fifteen patients participated. The analysis resulted in five lessons learned: 1) paternalistic decision-making is a dominant practice in early RA, 2) patients need emotional support and access to educational tools to facilitate participation in shared decision-making (SDM), 3) there are many logistical barriers to decision aid implementation in current care models, 4) flexibility is necessary for successful implementation, and 5) HCPs have limited interest in further training opportunities about decision aids. Implementation recommendations included the following: 1) making the decision aids directly available to patients (O) and providing SDM education (C/M), 2) creating an SDM rheumatology curriculum (C/O/M), 3) using "decision coaches" or patient partners as peer support (C/O/M), 4) linking decision aids to "living" rheumatology guidelines (M), and 5) designing trials of patient decision aid/SDM interventions to evaluate patient-important outcomes (O/M).

CONCLUSION

A multifaceted strategy is suggested to improve uptake of decision aids.

Decision Aid Implementation among Left Ventricular Assist Device Programs Participating in the DECIDE-LVAD Stepped-Wedge Trial

Background. Despite demonstrated efficacy, patient decision aids (DAs) are rarely used in clinical practice in the absence of coverage mandates. Deciding whether to pursue a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is a major, preference-sensitive decision-ideal for exploring implementation of a DA. Methods. We conducted a type II effectiveness-implementation hybrid trial at 6 LVAD programs using a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized design. Using the RE-AIM framework, we collected both quantitative and qualitative outcomes, including a checklist collected by study staff for each enrolled patient regarding DA use and interviews with LVAD program clinicians preintervention, 6 months postintervention, and at the conclusion of the study. Results. From June 2015 to January 2017, 248 patients and their caregivers were enrolled. A total of 69 interviews were conducted with 48 clinicians at 3 time points. The DA reached 95% of eligible patients. Adoption was 100%, as all sites approached agreed to participate in the trial. Interviews revealed several themes related to the implementation of the DA: clinicians had a strong desire to ensure patients were informed and embraced the DA. Despite this, they reported communication challenges among their team that impeded implementation. Five of the 6 sites have maintained use of the DA following the trial; 1 site reported concerns about decreased procedural volume with use of the DA as a reason for discontinuation. Conclusions. In this hybrid trial, a DA for patients considering LVADs and their caregivers demonstrated high reach. Adoption and implementation were facilitated by a strong desire to ensure that patients were well informed. Future dissemination research and practice should attend to concerns about procedure volume and coverage mandates and facilitate ongoing communication at sites using the DA.

Decision Analysis in SHared decision making for Thromboprophylaxis during Pregnancy (DASH-TOP): a sequential explanatory mixed methods pilot study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Decision analysis is a quantitative approach to decision making that could bridge the gap between decisions based solely on evidence and the unique values and preferences of individual patients, a feature especially important when existing evidence cannot support clear recommendations and there is a close balance between harms and benefits for the treatments options under consideration. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during pregnancy represents one such situation. The objective of this paper is to describe the rationale and methodology of a pilot study that will explore the application of decision analysis to a shared decision-making process involving prophylactic LMWH for pregnant women or those considering pregnancy who have experienced a VTE.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct an international, mixed methods, explanatory, sequential study, including quantitative data collection and analysis followed by qualitative data collection and analysis. In step I, we will ask women who are pregnant or considering pregnancy and have experienced VTE to participate in a shared decision-making intervention for prophylactic LMWH. The intervention consists of three components: a direct choice exercise, a values elicitation exercise and a personalised decision analysis. After administration of the intervention, we will ask women to make a treatment decision and measure decisional conflict, self-efficacy and satisfaction. In step II, which follows the analysis of quantitative data, we will use the results to inform the qualitative interview. Step III will be a qualitative descriptive study that explores participants' experiences and perceptions of the intervention. In step IV, we will integrate findings from the qualitative and quantitative analyses to obtain meta-inferences.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Site-specific ethics boards have approved the study. All participants will provide informed consent. The research team will take an integrated approach to knowledge translation.

An 11-Item Measure of User- and Human-Centered Design for Personal Health Tools (UCD-11): Development and Validation

BACKGROUND

Researchers developing personal health tools employ a range of approaches to involve prospective users in design and development.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this paper was to develop a validated measure of the human- or user-centeredness of design and development processes for personal health tools.

METHODS

We conducted a psychometric analysis of data from a previous systematic review of the design and development processes of 348 personal health tools. Using a conceptual framework of user-centered design, our team of patients, caregivers, health professionals, tool developers, and researchers analyzed how specific practices in tool design and development might be combined and used as a measure. We prioritized variables according to their importance within the conceptual framework and validated the resultant measure using principal component analysis with Varimax rotation, classical item analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis.

RESULTS

We retained 11 items in a 3-factor structure explaining 68% of the variance in the data. The Cronbach alpha was .72. Confirmatory factor analysis supported our hypothesis of a latent construct of user-centeredness. Items were whether or not: (1) patient, family, caregiver, or surrogate users were involved in the steps that help tool developers understand users or (2) develop a prototype, (3) asked their opinions, (4) observed using the tool or (5) involved in steps intended to evaluate the tool, (6) the process had 3 or more iterative cycles, (7) changes between cycles were explicitly reported, (8) health professionals were asked their opinion and (9) consulted before the first prototype was developed or (10) between initial and final prototypes, and (11) a panel of other experts was involved.

CONCLUSIONS

The User-Centered Design 11-item measure (UCD-11) may be used to quantitatively document the user/human-centeredness of design and development processes of patient-centered tools. By building an evidence base about such processes, we can help ensure that tools are adapted to people who will use them, rather than requiring people to adapt to tools.

Stakeholder perspectives on the implementation of shared decision making to empower youth who have experienced commercial sexual exploitation

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision making (SDM) has been proposed as a method to improve treatment adherence, placement stability, and other youth-centric outcomes for children who have been victims of commercial sexual exploitation (CSEC). This project seeks to characterize service providers' perspectives on the adoption and implementation of SDM into treatment and placement planning decisions.

METHOD

Sixteen key stakeholders who provide services for youth who have experienced CSEC in a Southern city, as well as adults who survived exploitation as children, were individually interviewed. These interviews focused on stakeholders' perspective on the appropriateness and contextual considerations regarding implementing this model to engage youth in decision-making conversations. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed using group-based inductive content analysis.

RESULT

While all participants acknowledged the philosophical importance of including youth in decision-making, perspectives varied on how this philosophy could be operationalized. Trauma-bonds to offenders, distrust in service systems, and policy and time constraints were discussed as potential barriers to implementation. Perceived benefits to applying this model included encouraging youth empowerment, helping youth develop decision-making skills, and strengthening relationships between youth and providers. Implementation considerations mirrored those seen in other medical and behavioral health settings, including extensive training, fidelity monitoring, enforcement through policy and legislation, and ultimately resetting the culture of services to be maximally youth inclusive.

CONCLUSION

Participants supported the use of SDM to standardize the inclusion of youth in treatment and placement planning decisions. However, there exist challenges in defining exactly how to adopt this approach, and how to implement broad-scale cultural change within the service-providing community.

Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening: How Well Are We "Sharing"?

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer screening (LCS) reduces lung cancer mortality, but it also carries a range of risks. Shared decision-making (SDM) is a process of engaging patients in their health care decisions and is a vital component of LCS.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the quality of SDM among patients recently assessed for LCS?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Cross-sectional study of screened patients recruited from two academic tertiary care centers in the South Central Region of the United States. Self-reported surveys assessed patient demographics, values related to outcomes of LCS, knowledge, SDM components including receipt of educational materials, and decisional conflict.

RESULTS

Recently screened patients (n = 266) possessed varied LCS knowledge, answering an average of 41.4% of questions correctly. Patients valued finding cancer early over concerns about harms. Patients indicated that LCS benefits were presented to them by a health care provider far more often than harms (68.3% vs 20.8%, respectively), and 30.7% reported they received educational materials about LCS during the screening process. One-third of patients had some decisional conflict (33.6%) related to their screening decisions, whereas most patients (86.6%) noted that they were involved in the screening decision as much as they wanted. In multivariate models, non-White race and having less education were related to lower knowledge scores. Non-White patients and former smokers were more likely to be conflicted about the screening decision. Most patients (n = 227 [85.3%]) indicated that a health care provider had discussed smoking cessation or abstinence with them.

INTERPRETATION

Among recently screened patients, the quality of decision-making about LCS is highly variable. The low use of educational materials including decision aids and imbalance of conveying benefit vs risk information to patients is concerning. A structured approach using decision aids may assist with providing a balanced presentation of information and may improve the quality of SDM.

How Patients and Providers Weigh the Risks and Benefits of Long-Term Opioid Therapy for Cancer Pain

PURPOSE

To understand how patients and providers weigh the risks and benefits of long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for cancer pain.

METHODS

Researchers used VA approved audio-recording devices to record interviews. ATLAS t.i., a qualitative analysis software, was used for analysis of transcribed interview data. Participants included 20 Veteran patients and 20 interdisciplinary providers from primary care- and oncology-based practice settings. We conducted semistructured interviews and analyzed transcripts used thematic qualitative methods. Interviews explored factors that affect decision making about appropriateness of LTOT for cancer related pain. We saturated themes for providers and patients separately.

RESULTS

Factors affecting patient decision-making included influence from various information sources, persuasion from trusted providers, and sometimes deferral of the decision to their provider. Relative prioritization of pain management as the focal patient concern varied with some patients describing comparatively more fear of chemotherapy than opioid analgesics, comparatively more knowledge of opioids in relation to other drugs;patients expressed a preference to spend the limited time they have with their oncologist discussing cancer treatment rather than opioid use. Factors affecting provider decision making included prognosis, patient goals, patient characteristics, and provider experience and biases. Providers differed in how they weigh the relative importance of alleviating pain or avoiding opioids in the face of treating patients with cancer and histories of substance abuse.

CONCLUSION

Divergent perspectives on factors need to be considered when weighing risks and benefits. Policies and interventions should be designed to reduce variation in practice to promote equal access to adequate pain management. Improved shared decision-making initiatives will take advantage of patient decision-making factors and priorities.

Shared Decision-Making for Left Ventricular Assist Devices: Rationale and Design of a Nationwide Dissemination and Implementation Project

Background The left ventricular assist device (LVAD) has become a common medical option for patients with end-stage heart failure. Although patients' chances of survival may increase with an LVAD compared with medical therapy, the LVAD poses many risks and requires major lifestyle changes, thus making it a complex medical decision. Our prior work found that a decision aid for LVADs significantly increased decision quality for both patients and caregivers and was successfully implemented at 6 LVAD programs. Methods In follow-up, we are conducting a nationwide dissemination and implementation project, with the goal of implementing the decision aid at as many of the 176 LVAD programs in the United States as possible. Guided by the Theory of Diffusion of Innovations, the project consists of 4 phases: (1) building a network; (2) promoting adoption; (3) supporting implementation; and (4) encouraging maintenance. Developing an LVAD network of contacts occurs by using a national baseline survey of LVAD clinicians, existing professional relationships, and an internet-based strategy. A suite of resources targeted to promote adoption and support implementation of the decision aid into standard LVAD education processes are provided to the network. Evaluation is guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance framework, where clinician and patient surveys and qualitative interviews determine the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance achieved. Conclusions This project is a true dissemination study in that it targets the entire population of LVAD programs in the United States and is unique in its use of social marketing principles to promote adoption and implementation. The implementation plan is intended to serve as a test case and model for dissemination and implementation of other evidence-based decision support aids and strategies.

Characterizing patient-oncologist communication in genomic tumor testing: The 21-gene recurrence score as an exemplar

OBJECTIVE

Women with early-stage, ER + breast cancer are recommend to receive genomic profiling tests, such as the 21-gene Recurrence Score (RS) test, to guide treatment decisions. We examined test- and treatment-related information discussed and the associations between RS categories and aspects of communication during patient-oncologist clinical encounters.

METHODS

As part of a larger trial, clinical encounters (N = 46) were audiorecorded and coded for 1) RS- and treatment-related information, 2) shared decision making, 3) patient active participation, and 4) oncologist patient-centered communication. We examined differences by RS category using mixed models, adjusting for nesting within oncologist.

RESULTS

Patients with a high RS were more likely to receive a chemotherapy recommendation (p < .01), hear about the risks/side effects of chemotherapy (p < .01), and offer their preferences (p = .02) than those with intermediate or low RS. Elements of shared decision making increased with RS. Oncologist patient-centered communication (M = 4.09/5, SD = .25) and patient active participation (M = 3.5/4, SD = 1.0) were high across RS.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that disease severity, rather than clinical uncertainty, impact treatment recommendations and shared decision making.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Oncologists adjust test- and treatment-related information and shared decision making by disease severity. This information provides a framework to inform decision making in complex cancer and genomics settings.

Chinese mental health professionals' perceptions of shared decision-making regarding people diagnosed with schizophrenia: A qualitative study

The implementation of shared decision-making regarding people diagnosed with schizophrenia is limited, although it is reported to have a positive impact on improving treatment adherence, therapeutic relationships and saving medical costs. The successful implementation of it is mainly dependent on the active engagement of mental health professionals. This study aims to identify mental health professionals' perceptions of shared decision-making regarding people diagnosed with schizophrenia in collectivist cultures such as Chinese culture. A qualitative descriptive approach was used, involving ten individual interviews with psychiatrists and four focus groups with twenty-three mental health nurses from the psychiatry department of a tertiary hospital in mainland China. An inductive thematic approach was used to analyze the data. Two main themes with five subthemes generated: willingness to engage in shared decision-making and perceiving shared decision-making as unachievable. The last theme included five subthemes: (i) deference to authority, (ii) tension between family decision-making and patient autonomy, (iii) uncertainty of trusting therapeutic relationships, (iv) implicit persuasion and (v) insufficient consultation time. Patients often lack opportunity and support to engage in decision-making. Mental health nurses in other countries need to be aware that Chinese patients and patients with a similar background are not knowledgeable about or value shared decision-making to the extent that other countries might. They need to evaluate and support them, including encouraging them to engage in decision-making as well as providing appropriate information. Mental health nurses need to collaborate with patients and their families to achieve patient-centred care when family involvement is expected.

The role of older patients' goals in GP decision-making about medicines: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

To optimise medication use in older people, it is recommended that clinicians evaluate evidence on potential benefits and harms of medicines in light of the patients' overall health, values and goals. This suggests general practitioners (GPs) should attempt to facilitate patient involvement in decision-making. In practice this is often challenging. In this qualitative study, we explored GPs' perspectives on the importance of discussing patients' goals and preferences, and the role patient preferences play in medicines management and prioritisation.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs from Australia (n = 32). Participants were purposively sampled to recruit GPs with variation in experience level and geographic location. Transcribed audio-recordings of interviews were coded using Framework Analysis.

RESULTS

The results showed that most GPs recognised some value in understanding older patients' goals and preferences regarding their medicines. Most reported some discussions of goals and preferences with patients, but often this was initiated by the patient. Practical barriers were reported such as limited time during busy consultations to discuss issues beyond acute problems. GPs differed on the following main themes: 1) definition and perception of patients' goals, 2) relationship with the patient, 3) approach to medicines management and prioritisation. We observed that GPs preferred one of three different practice patterns in their approach to patients' goals in medicines decisions: 1) goals and preferences considered lower priority - 'Directive'; 2) goals seen as central - 'Goal-oriented'; 3) goals and preferences considered but not explicitly elicited - 'Tacit'.

CONCLUSIONS

This study explores how GPs differ in their approach to eliciting patients' goals and preferences, and how these differences are operationalised in the context of older adults taking multiple medicines. Although there are challenges in providing care that aligns with patients' goals and preferences, this study shows how complex decisions are made between GPs and their older patients in clinical practice. This work may inform future research that investigates how GPs can best incorporate the priorities of older people in decision-making around medicines. Developing practical support strategies may assist clinicians to involve patients in discussions about their medicines.

Stakeholder Values and Preferences in Lower Limb Amputation for No-Option Chronic Limb Threatening Ischemia

PURPOSE

This study focusses on identifying values and preferences of patients, caregivers and healthcare professionals who have dealt with lower limb amputation for no-option chronic limb threatening ischemia. No-option chronic limb threatening ischemia is defined as limb ischemia for which no treatment options exist and where lower limb amputation is necessary in the short term. The values and preferences identified in this study can help improve decision-making processes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a qualitative study, using semi-structured interviews to gather data from patients, caregivers and healthcare professionals. Participants were selected from the patient and employee population of an academic medical center in The Netherlands. Nine patients and seven caregivers who dealt with lower limb amputation for no-option chronic limb threatening ischemia six to twelve months prior to the interview and were not cognitively impaired were selected. Nine healthcare professionals dealing with patients with no-option chronic limb threatening ischemia and lower limb amputation were selected.

RESULTS

Lower limb amputation was explicitly discussed late in the disease process, sometimes during an emergency setting. Patients stated goals were never discussed, healthcare professionals stated they were. The most important goal for patients was to live independently after lower limb amputation. Patients and caregivers feel healthcare professionals should be upfront about the possible necessity of lower limb amputation. Reasons to undergo lower limb amputation were absence of treatment options, pain and wanting to enjoy life again. Participants indicated accelerating lower limb amputation was not a viable option.

CONCLUSION

All stakeholders reported overlapping values and preferences regarding main reasons for lower limb amputation, the primary goals after lower limb amputation, and the absence of a desire to accelerate lower limb amputation. The main difference in values and preferences is the preferred timing of discussing lower limb amputation.

Patient Perspectives on Detox: Practical and Personal Considerations through a Lens of Patient-Centered Care

Inpatient detoxification is often required before a client can move on to additional substance abuse treatment services. Although often short-term, time spent in inpatient detoxification tends to have long-lasting effects on the recovery process. This qualitative study focuses on one treatment facility in Tampa, Florida that offers a range of recovery services, including inpatient detox and outpatient treatment. Focus groups (N = 70 participants) captured client perceptions of direct clinical care operations, access to resources, and relationships with direct care staff within the inpatient detox program. Perceptions were then assessed using a thematic analysis approach with attention to the literature on person-centered care best practices, behavior change, and patient engagement theories to better understand how facility practices affect treatment engagement and retention. Findings elucidated several practical facilitators and barriers to recovery such as facility resources, services offered, transition to aftercare, and sustainability of treatment. Findings also illuminated several personal facilitators and barriers including patient-staff interactions, personal motivation, and family and community support. The resulting recommendations for practice and research are discussed.

Effect of a multilevel implementation programme on shared decision-making in breast cancer care

BACKGROUND

Women with newly diagnosed breast cancer face multiple treatment options. Involving them in a shared decision-making (SDM) process is essential. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a multilevel implementation programme enhanced the level of SDM behaviour of clinicians observed in consultations.

METHODS

This before-after study was conducted in six Dutch hospitals. Patients with breast cancer who were facing a decision on surgery or neoadjuvant systemic treatment between April 2016 and September 2017 were included, and provided informed consent. Audio recordings of consultations made before and after implementation were analysed using the five-item Observing Patient Involvement in Decision-Making (OPTION-5) instrument to assess whether clinicians adopted new behaviour needed for applying SDM. Patients scored their perceived level of SDM, using the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Hospital, duration of the consultation(s), age, and number of consultations per patient that might influence OPTION-5 scores were investigated using linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

Consultations of 139 patients were audiotaped, including 80 before and 59 after implementation. Mean (s.d.) OPTION-5 scores, expressed on a 0-100 scale, increased from 38.3 (15.0) at baseline to 53.2 (14.8) 1 year after implementation (mean difference (MD) 14.9, 95 per cent c.i. 9.9 to 19.9). SDM-Q-9 scores of 105 patients (75.5 per cent) (72 before and 33 after implementation) were high and showed no significant changes (91.3 versus 87.6; MD -3.7, -9.3 to 1.9). The implementation programme had an association with OPTION-5 scores (β = 14.2, P < 0.001), hospital (β = 2.2, P = 0.002), and consultation time (β = 0.2, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

A multilevel implementation programme supporting SDM in breast cancer care increased the adoption of SDM behaviour of clinicians in consultations.

How to approach shared decision making when determining consolidation, maintenance therapy, and transplantation in acute myeloid leukemia

Until recently, treatment options for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) were limited to cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents that possessed little specificity for the cytogenetic and molecular mutations known to risk stratify patients with this disease. With the approval of multiple new therapies, not only have the agents that we treat patients with changed, but the way we talk about these options, decide on, and manage therapy has also been transformed. Given these complexities, it is important that we help patients make an informed decision by weighing the risk of relapse with patient wishes and desired quality of life. Shared decision making (SDM) is an approach to medical decision making for those situations in which most clinicians would agree that there is more than 1 correct choice for a patient. Here we review the principles of SDM and provide an overview of the 3-talk model and how it may be incorporated into the care of patients with AML.

Hyaline fibromatosis syndrome: A case report

Hyaline fibromatosis syndrome (HFS) is a rare monogenic disease inherited in an autosomal recessive pattern and characterized by hyaline deposits on the skin, mucosa, and multiple organs; osteoporosis; and joint contractures. This progressive condition is caused by mutations in the gene encoding the anthrax toxin receptor 2 protein (ANTXR2). HFS is a disabling disease, and patients suffer from progressive pain and disfiguring symptoms. There are few published case reports detailing oral findings in patients with this condition. The present case report describes a 4-year-old female patient who showed severe manifestations of HFS, emphasizing the oral manifestations, the histopathologic aspects of HFS, the molecular pathogenesis, and the interdisciplinary management of patients affected by this condition.

Introducing Decision Aids into Routine Prostate Cancer Care in The Netherlands: Implementation and Patient Evaluations from the Multi-regional JIPPA Initiative

Uptake of decision aids (DAs) in daily routine is low, resulting in limited knowledge about successful DA implementation at a large scale. We assessed implementation rates after multi-regional implementation of three different prostate cancer (PCa) treatment DAs and patient-perceived barriers and facilitators to use a DA. Thirty-three hospitals implemented one out of the three DAs in routine care. Implementation rates for each DA were calculated per hospital. After deciding about PCa treatment, patients (n = 1033) completed a survey on pre-formulated barriers and facilitators to use a DA. Overall DA implementation was 40%. For each DA alike, implementation within hospitals varied from incidental (< 10% of eligible patients receiving a DA) to high rates of implementation (> 80%). All three DAs were evaluated positively by patients, although concise and paper DAs yielded higher satisfaction scores compared with an elaborate online DA. Patients were most satisfied when they received the DA within a week after diagnosis. Pre-formulated barriers to DA usage were experienced by less than 10% of the patients, and most patients confirmed the facilitators. Many patients received a DA during treatment counseling, although a wide variation in uptake across hospitals was observed for each DA. Most patients were satisfied with the DA they received. Sustained implementation of DAs in clinical routine requires further encouragement and attention.

Group-randomized trial of tailored brief shared decision-making to improve asthma control in urban black adults

AIMS

To assess the intervention effects of BREATHE (BRief intervention to Evaluate Asthma THErapy), a novel brief shared decision-making intervention and evaluate feasibility and acceptability of intervention procedures.

DESIGN

Group-randomized longitudinal pilot study.

METHODS

In total, 80 adults with uncontrolled persistent asthma participated in a trial comparing BREATHE (N = 40) to a dose-matched attention control intervention (N = 40). BREATHE is a one-time shared decision-making intervention delivered by clinicians during routine office visits. Ten clinicians were randomized and trained on BREATHE or the control condition. Participants were followed monthly for 3 months post-intervention. Data were collected from December 2017 - May 2019 and included surveys, lung function tests, and interviews.

RESULTS

Participants were Black/multiracial (100%) mostly female (83%) adults (mean age 45). BREATHE clinicians delivered BREATHE to all 40 participants with fidelity based on expert review of audiorecordings. While the control group reported improvements in asthma control at 1-month and 3-month follow-up, only BREATHE participants had better asthma control at each timepoint (β = 0.77; standard error (SE)[0.17]; p ≤ 0.0001; β = 0.71; SE[0.16]; p ≤ 0.0001; β = 0.54; SE[0.15]; p = .0004), exceeding the minimally important difference. BREATHE participants also perceived greater shared decision-making occurred during the intervention visit (β = 7.39; SE[3.51]; p = .03) and fewer symptoms at follow-up (e.g., fewer nights woken, less shortness of breath and less severity of symptoms) than the controls. Both groups reported improved adherence and fewer erroneous medication beliefs.

CONCLUSION

BREATHE is a promising brief tailored intervention that can be integrated into office visits using clinicians as interventionists. Thus, BREATHE offers a pragmatic approach to improving asthma outcomes and shared decision-making in a health disparity population.

IMPACT

The study addressed the important problem of uncontrolled asthma in a high-risk vulnerable population. Compared with the dose-matched attention control condition, participants receiving the novel brief tailored shared decision-making intervention had significant improvements in asthma outcomes and greater perceived engagement in shared decision-making. Brief interventions integrated into office visits and delivered by clinicians may offer a pragmatic approach to narrowing health disparity gaps. Future studies where other team members (e.g., office nurses, social workers) are trained in shared decision-making may address important implementation science challenges as it relates to adoption, maintenance, and dissemination. TRAIL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov # NCT03300752.

Encouraging Patient Engagement Behaviors from the Perspective of Functional Quality

Despite extensive research on how patient engagement behaviors (PEBs) are facilitated though explicit technical interventions in medical services, research on the encouragement of PEBs from the perspective of the service process is lacking. This study explores how functional quality dimensions (responsiveness, empathy, surroundings, and access) affect PEBs (compliance and loyalty) through a two-channel psychological mechanism (trust and satisfaction). This study tests the proposed model using survey data from two public hospitals in southeastern China and employs the partial least square (PLS) technique of structural equation modeling (SEM) to analyze the data. The results show that service providers’ responsiveness, empathy, and access affect patient compliance and loyalty through patient satisfaction; however, the effect of surroundings is not significant. The responsiveness and empathy of service staff affect PEBs through patient trust. Considering the high-contact professional nature of medical services, we call for more efforts toward improving service processes rather than simply relying on technical interventions. Specifically, hospitals and contact employees should devote time and effort to functional quality management in three dimensions, namely responsiveness, empathy, and access, to secure patient trust and satisfaction.

What older adults and their caregivers need for making better health-related decisions at home: a participatory mixed methods protocol

INTRODUCTION

Shared decision making is an interpersonal process whereby healthcare providers collaborate with and support patients in decision-making. Older adults receiving home care need support with decision-making. We will explore what older adults receiving home care and their caregivers need for making better health-related decisions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This two-phase sequential exploratory mixed methods study will be conducted in a pan-Canadian healthcare organisation, SE Health. First, we will create a participant advisory group to advise us throughout the research process. In phase 1 (qualitative), we will recruit a convenience sample of 15-30 older adults and caregivers receiving home care to participate in open-ended semi-structured interviews. Phase 1 participants will be invited to share what health-related decisions they face at home and what they need for making better decisions. In phase 2 (quantitative), interdisciplinary health and social care providers will be invited to answer a web-based survey to share their views on the decisional needs of older adults and their caregivers. The survey will include questions informed by findings from qualitative interviews in phase 1, and a workbook for assessing decisional needs based on the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. Finally, qualitative and quantitative results will be triangulated (by methods, investigator, theory and source) to develop a comprehensive understanding of decision-making needs from the perspective of older adults, caregivers and health and social care providers. We will use the quality of mixed methods studies in health services research guidelines and the Checklist for Reporting the Results of Internet E-Surveys checklist.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained from the research ethics boards at Southlake Regional Health Centre and Université Laval. This study will inform the design of decision support interventions. Further dissemination plans include summary briefs for study participants, tailored reports for home care decision makers and policy makers, and peer-reviewed publications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04327830.

What makes difficult decisions so difficult?: An activity theory analysis of decision making for physicians treating children with medical complexity

OBJECTIVE

Shared Decision-Making (SDM) has been advocated as an ideal model of decision-making in the medical encounter. Much of the research into SDM has focused on measuring if SDM is happening, or facilitating SDM by developing specific models and tools. Understanding SDM as an activity in context, has remained mostly absent from the research. This study sought to garner details on the actions, judgements and motives that comprise the activity of making a decision, in the context of a shared process between physicians and families of Children with Medical Complexity (CMC).

METHODS

11 physicians who treat CMC were interviewed. Activity Theory framework was employed to understand the complexity of the decision-making process in context.

RESULTS

Ambiguous information, conflicting rules, and beliefs on roles all contribute to the difficulty of decision-making. A decision is achieved by allocating the decision to one party.

CONCLUSION

Lack of tools, rules or beliefs that would assist sharing the decision between the physician and patient/family, contributes to the need to allocate the decision to one party.

PRACTICE IMPLICATION

In developing SDM policies and tools, one must consider all aspects of the SDM activity system, and how they influence each other and the activity as a whole.

End-of-life decision making in the context of chronic life-limiting disease: a concept analysis and conceptual model

BACKGROUND

Conceptual ambiguities prevent advancements in end-of-life decision making in clinical practice and research.

PURPOSE

To clarify the components of and stakeholders (patients, caregivers, healthcare providers) involved in end-of-life decision making in the context of chronic life-limiting disease and develop a conceptual model.

METHOD

Walker and Avant's approach to concept analysis.

FINDINGS

End-of-life decision making is a process, not a discrete event, that begins with preparation, including decision maker designation and iterative stakeholder communication throughout the chronic illness (antecedents). These processes inform end-of-life decisions during terminal illness, involving: 1) serial choices 2) weighed in terms of potential outcomes 3) through patient and caregiver collaboration (attributes). Components impact patients' death, caregivers' bereavement, and healthcare systems' outcomes (consequences).

DISCUSSION

Findings provide a foundation for improved inquiry into and measurement of the end-of-life decision making process, accounting for the dose, content, and quality the antecedent and attribute factors that collectively contribute to outcomes.

Web-Based Training for Nurses on Shared Decision Making and Prenatal Screening for Down Syndrome: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Pregnant women often find it difficult to choose from among the wide variety of available prenatal screening options. To help pregnant women and their partners make informed decisions based on their values, needs, and preferences, a decision aid and a web-based shared decision making (SDM) training program for health professionals have been developed. In Canada, nurses provide maternity care and thus can train as decision coaches for prenatal screening. However, there is a knowledge gap about the effectiveness of SDM interventions in maternity care in nursing practice.

Objective

This study aims to assess the impact of an SDM training program on nurses’ intentions to use a decision aid for prenatal screening and on their knowledge and to assess their overall impressions of the training.

Methods

This is a 2-arm parallel randomized trial. French-speaking nurses working with pregnant women in the province of Quebec were recruited online by a private survey firm. They were randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to either an experimental group, which completed a web-based SDM training program that included prenatal screening, or a control group, which completed a web-based training program focusing on prenatal screening alone. The experimental intervention consisted of a 3-hour web-based training hosted on the Université Laval platform with 4 modules: (1) SDM; (2) Down syndrome prenatal screening; (3) decision aids; and (4) communication between health care professionals and the patient. For the control group, the topic of SDM in Module 1 was replaced with “Context and history of prenatal screening,” and the topic of decision aids in Module 3 was replaced with “Consent in prenatal screening.” Participants completed a self-administered sociodemographic questionnaire with close-ended questions. We also assessed the participants' (1) intention to use a decision aid in prenatal screening clinical practice, (2) knowledge, (3) satisfaction with the training, (4) acceptability, and (5) perceived usefulness of the training. The randomization was done using a predetermined sequence and included 40 nurses. Participants and researchers were blinded. Intention to use a decision aid will be assessed by a t test. Bivariate and multivariate analysis will be performed to assess knowledge and overall impressions of the training.

Results

This study was funded in 2017 and approved by Genome Canada. Data were collected from September 2019 to late January 2020. This paper was initially submitted before data analysis began. Results are expected to be published in winter 2020.

Conclusions

Study results will inform us on the impact of an SDM training program on nurses’ intention to use and knowledge of decision aids for prenatal screening and their overall impressions of the training. Participant feedback will also inform an upgrade of the program, if needed.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04162288; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04162288

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/17878

The role of hospital nurses in shared decision-making about life-prolonging treatment: A qualitative interview study

Aims

To examine hospital nurses’ perception of their actual and potential contribution to shared decision‐making about life‐prolonging treatment and their perception of the pre‐conditions for such a contribution.

Design

A qualitative interview study.

Methods

Semi‐structured face‐to‐face interviews were conducted with 18 hospital nurses who were involved in care for patients with life‐threatening illnesses. Data were collected from October 2018‐January 2019. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis by two researchers.

Results

Nurses experienced varying degrees of influence on decision‐making about life‐prolonging treatment. Besides, we identified different points of contact in the treatment trajectory at which nurses could be involved in treatment decision‐making. Nurses’ descriptions of behaviours that potentially contribute to shared decision‐making were classified into three roles as follows: checking the quality of a decision, complementing shared decision‐making and facilitating shared decision‐making. Pre‐conditions for fulfilling the roles identified in this study were: (a) the transfer of information among nurses and between nurses and other healthcare professionals; (b) a culture where there is a positive attitude to nurses' involvement in decision‐making; (c) a good relationship with physicians; (d) knowledge and skills; (e) sufficient time; and (f) a good relationship with patients.

Conclusion

Nurses described behaviour that reflected a supporting role in shared decision‐making about patients’ life‐prolonging treatment, although not all nurses experienced this involvement as such. Nurses can enhance the shared decision‐making process by checking the decision quality and by complementing and facilitating shared decision‐making.

Impact

Nurses are increasingly considered instrumental in the shared decision‐making process. To facilitate their contribution, future research should focus on the possible impact of nurses’ involvement in treatment decision‐making and on evidence‐based training to raise awareness and offer guidance for nurses on how to adopt this role.

Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review

Background

Shared decision making (SDM) in healthcare is an approach in which health professionals support patients in making decisions based on best evidence and their values and preferences. Considering sex and gender in SDM research is necessary to produce precisely-targeted interventions, improve evidence quality and redress health inequities. A first step is correct use of terms. We therefore assessed sex and gender terminology in SDM intervention studies.

Materials and methods

We performed a secondary analysis of a Cochrane review of SDM interventions. We extracted study characteristics and their use of sex, gender or related terms (mention; number of categories). We assessed correct use of sex and gender terms using three criteria: “non-binary use”, “use of appropriate categories” and “non-interchangeable use of sex and gender”. We computed the proportion of studies that met all, any or no criteria, and explored associations between criteria met and study characteristics.

Results

Of 87 included studies, 58 (66.7%) mentioned sex and/or gender. The most mentioned related terms were “female” (60.9%) and “male” (59.8%). Of the 58 studies, authors used sex and gender as binary variables respectively in 36 (62%) and in 34 (58.6%) studies. No study met the criterion “non-binary use”. Authors used appropriate categories to describe sex and gender respectively in 28 (48.3%) and in 8 (13.8%) studies. Of the 83 (95.4%) studies in which sex and/or gender, and/or related terms were mentioned, authors used sex and gender non-interchangeably in 16 (19.3%). No study met all three criteria. Criteria met did not vary according to study characteristics (p>.05).

Conclusions

In SDM implementation studies, sex and gender terms and concepts are in a state of confusion. Our results suggest the urgency of adopting a standardized use of sex and gender terms and concepts before these considerations can be properly integrated into implementation research.

Pay for Performance and Treatment Outcome in Agonist Treatment for Opioid Use Disorder

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Pay for performance (P4P) models have become more popular in reimbursement for medical services, including treatment for substance use disorders. However, studies have not examined whether P4P has an impact on treatment outcome in the individual in opioid agonist treatment (OAT). Thus, the present study was conducted at the individual level, rather than the programmatic level, to determine whether meeting the P4P early engagement criteria (four services in the initial 14 days of treatment and/or eight services within the initial 30 days of treatment) resulted in reduced opioid, benzodiazepine, and cocaine use.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 63 patients enrolled in OAT for opioid use disorder. χ² analyses were conducted crossing P4P early engagement criteria status and urine drug screen (UDS) results for opioid, cocaine, and/or benzodiazepine use at 6 and 12 months postadmission. Methadone dosage and treatment retention were also considered. The odds ratio was used to determine the directionality of significant results.

RESULTS

Significant relationships were revealed between patients meeting 30-day P4P early engagement criteria and opioid negative UDS, and with retention in treatment at 6 and 12 months. Methadone dosage was significant at a 6-month follow-up.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Since significant associations between opioid use and P4P as well as opioid use and methadone dose were revealed, findings partially supported hypothesis.

SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE

P4P and methadone dosage may have some benefit to individuals in OAT in attaining short-term abstinence from opioids. P4P may be less useful in helping individuals achieve abstinence from other substances of abuse. (Am J Addict 2020;00:00-00).

Dealing with the Lack of Time for Detailed Shared Decision-making in Primary Care: Everyday Shared Decision-making

Policymakers and researchers are strongly encouraging clinicians to support patient autonomy through shared decision-making (SDM). In setting policies for clinical care, decision-makers need to understand that current models of SDM have tended to focus on major decisions (e.g., surgeries and chemotherapy) and focused less on everyday primary care decisions. Most decisions in primary care are substantive everyday decisions: intermediate-stakes decisions that occur dozens of times every day, yet are non-trivial for patients, such as whether routine mammography should start at age 40, 45, or 50. Expectations that busy clinicians use current models of SDM (here referred to as "detailed" SDM) for these decisions can feel overwhelming to clinicians. Evidence indicates that detailed SDM is simply not realistic for most of these decisions and without a feasible alternative, clinicians usually default to a decision-making approach with little to no personalization. We propose, for discussion and refinement, a compromise approach to personalizing these decisions (everyday SDM). Everyday SDM is based on a feasible process for supporting patient autonomy that also allows clinicians to continue being respectful health advocates for their patients. We propose that alternatives to detailed SDM are needed to make progress toward more patient-centered care.

Adaptation and qualitative evaluation of Ask 3 Questions - a simple and generic intervention to foster patient empowerment

BACKGROUND

Patients are often not actively engaged in medical encounters. Short interventions like Ask 3 Questions (Ask3Q) can increase patient participation in decision-making. Up to now, Ask3Q was not available in German.

OBJECTIVE

To translate Ask3Q and evaluate its acceptability and feasibility.

METHODS

We translated and adapted several English versions of Ask3Q using a team translation protocol and cognitive interviews. Acceptability and feasibility of the final German Ask3Q version were assessed via focus groups and interviews with patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Data were analysed via qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Translation and adaptation were successful. Participants of focus groups and interviews perceived Ask3Q as a tool to empower patients to ask more questions. Moreover, it was seen as a guideline for physicians not to forget conveying important information. Several characteristics of patients, HCPs, the clinical setting and the intervention were identified as facilitators and barriers for an effective implementation of Ask3Q.

CONCLUSION

We provide the German version of Ask3Q. According to participants, implementation of Ask3Q in the German healthcare system is feasible. Future studies should evaluate if positive effects of Ask3Q can be replicated for patient participation and communication behaviour of HCPs in Germany.

"All about the money?" A qualitative interview study examining organizational- and system-level characteristics that promote or hinder shared decision-making in cancer care in the United States

BACKGROUND

Despite decades of ethical, empirical, and policy support, shared decision-making (SDM) has failed to become standard practice in US cancer care. Organizational and health system characteristics appear to contribute to the difficulties in implementing SDM in routine care. However, little is known about the relevance of the different characteristics in specific healthcare settings. The aim of the study was to explore how organizational and health system characteristics affect SDM implementation in US cancer care.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with diverse cancer care stakeholders in the USA. Of the 36 invited, 30 (83%) participants consented to interview. We used conventional content analysis to analyze transcript content.

RESULTS

The dominant theme in the data obtained was that concerns regarding a lack of revenue generation, or indeed, the likely loss of revenue, were a major barrier preventing implementation of SDM. Many other factors were prominent as well, but the view that SDM might impair organizational or individual profit margins and reduce the income of some health professionals was widespread. On the organizational level, having leadership support for SDM and multidisciplinary teams were viewed as critical to implementation. On the health system level, views diverged on whether embedding tools into electronic health records (EHRs), making SDM a criterion for accreditation and certification, and enacting legislation could promote SDM implementation.

CONCLUSION

Cancer care in the USA has currently limited room for SDM and is prone to paying lip service to the idea. Implementation efforts in US cancer care need to go further than interventions that target only the clinician-patient level. On a policy level, SDM could be included in alternative payment models. However, its implementation would need to be thoroughly assessed in order to prevent further misdirected incentivization through box ticking.

Do Physicians' Attitudes towards Patient-Centered Communication Promote Physicians' Intention and Behavior of Involving Patients in Medical Decisions?

Promoting patient-centered communication among physicians is one core strategy for improving physician-patient relationships and patient outcomes. Our study aims to understand the physicians' attitudes towards patient-centered communication and its effects on physicians' intention and behavior of involving patients in medical decisions in primary care in China. One cross-sectional study was conducted in primary facilities in Hubei province, China, from December 2019 to January 2020, where physicians' attitudes towards patient-centered communication were measured by the Chinese-revised patient-practitioner orientation scale. Multilevel ordinal logistic regression was conducted for estimating the effects of physicians' attitudes on their intention and behavior of patient involvement in medical decisions. Six hundred and seventeen physicians were investigated for the main study. Physicians had a medium score of patient-centered communication (3.78, SD = 0.56), with relatively high caring subscale score (4.59, SD = 0.64), and low sharing subscale score (3.09, SD = 0.75). After controlling physicians' covariates, physicians' attitudes towards patient-centered communication was significantly associated with a higher intention of involving patients in medical decisions (OR > 1, p = 0.020). Physicians' positive attitudes towards patient-centered communication affected their intention of involving patients in medical decisions, which implies the importance of taking the physicians' attitudes into account for the accomplishment of patient involvement processes.