Patient-centered care and preference-sensitive decision making

Preference Sensitive Care and Shared Decision-Making in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Scoping Review

STUDY DESIGN

Scoping review.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to conduct a scoping review exploring the extent to which preference sensitivity has been studied in treatment decisions for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), utilizing shared decision-making (SDM) as a proxy.

BACKGROUND

Preference-sensitive care involves situations where multiple treatment options exist with significant tradeoffs in cost, outcome, recovery time, and quality of life. LSS has gained research focus as a preference-sensitive care scenario.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A scoping review protocol in accordance with "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews" regulations was registered with the Open Science Framework (ID: 9ewup) and conducted across multiple databases from January 2000 to October 2022. Study selection and characterization were performed by 3 independent reviewers and an unbiased moderator.

RESULTS

The search resulted in the inclusion of 16 studies varying in design and sample size, with most published between 2016 and 2021. The studies examined variables related to SDM, patient preferences, surgeon preferences, and decision aids (DAs). The outcomes assessed included treatment choice, patient satisfaction, and patient understanding. Several studies reported that SDM influenced treatment choice and patient satisfaction, while the impact on patient understanding was less clear. DAs were used in some studies to facilitate SDM.

CONCLUSION

The scoping review identified a gap in comprehensive studies analyzing the preference sensitivity of treatment for LSS and the role of DAs. Further research is needed to better understand the impact of patient preferences on treatment decisions and the effectiveness of DAs in LSS care. This review provides a foundation for future research in preference-sensitive care and SDM in the context of lumbar stenosis treatment.

Evaluation and Modification of a Shared Decision-Making Tool for Peanut Allergy Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Based on shared decision-making (SDM) principles, a decision aid was previously developed to help patients, their caregivers, and physicians decide which peanut allergy management approach best suits them. This study refined the decision aid's content to better reflect patients' and caregivers' lived experience.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current standard of care for peanut allergy is avoidance, although peanut oral immunotherapy has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in patients 4-17 years old. An advisory board of allergy therapy experts (n = 3) and patient advocates (n = 3) informed modifications to the decision aid. The revised tool underwent cognitive debriefing interviews (CDIs) among adolescents (12-17 years old) with peanut allergy and caregivers of patients 4-17 years old with peanut allergy to evaluate its relevance, understandability, and usefulness. The 20 CDI participants understood the information presented in the SDM tool and reported it was important and relevant. Some revisions were made based on participant feedback. Results support content validity of the Peanut Allergy Treatment SDM Tool.

Patient satisfaction with ultrasound, whole-body CT and whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI for pre-operative ovarian cancer staging: a multicenter prospective cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

In addition to the diagnostic accuracy of imaging methods, patient-reported satisfaction with imaging methods is important.

OBJECTIVE

To report a secondary outcome of the prospective international multicenter Imaging Study in Advanced ovArian Cancer (ISAAC Study), detailing patients' experience with abdomino-pelvic ultrasound, whole-body contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT), and whole-body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (WB-DWI/MRI) for pre-operative ovarian cancer work-up.

METHODS

In total, 144 patients with suspected ovarian cancer at four institutions in two countries (Italy, Czech Republic) underwent ultrasound, CT, and WB-DWI/MRI for pre-operative work-up between January 2020 and November 2022. After having undergone all three examinations, the patients filled in a questionnaire evaluating their overall experience and experience in five domains: preparation before the examination, duration of examination, noise during the procedure, radiation load of CT, and surrounding space. Pain perception, examination-related patient-perceived unexpected, unpleasant, or dangerous events ('adverse events'), and preferred method were also noted.

RESULTS

Ultrasound was the preferred method by 49% (70/144) of responders, followed by CT (38%, 55/144), and WB-DWI/MRI (13%, 19/144) (p<0.001). The poorest experience in all domains was reported for WB-DWI/MRI, which was also associated with the largest number of patients who reported adverse events (eg, dyspnea). Patients reported higher levels of pain during the ultrasound examination than during CT and WB-DWI/MRI (p<0.001): 78% (112/144) reported no pain or mild pain, 19% (27/144) moderate pain, and 3% (5/144) reported severe pain (pain score >7 of 10) during the ultrasound examination. We did not identify any factors related to patients' preferred method.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound was the imaging method preferred by most patients despite being associated with more pain during the examination in comparison with CT and WB-DWI/MRI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03808792.

Shared decision-making in food allergy: Navigating an exciting era

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision-making (SDM) is increasingly used in food allergy. We review its use in the areas of prevention, diagnosis, and management.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and online SDM resources.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Studies and reviews relevant to SDM and areas in food allergy that decision-making may be applied were selected for discussion.

RESULTS

Food allergy represents an area with multiple opportunities for SDM. Patients, on one hand, need to obtain the necessary information and understanding of existing options from the allergist. The allergist, on the other hand, needs to understand "where the patient is coming from," their needs, preferences, and values, so that jointly they can reach a decision that is responsive to these. Benefits of SDM include a better understanding of disease by patients, improved compliance with medication, better health outcomes, decreased health care costs, and improved ability of patients to manage their disease and make informed choices.

CONCLUSION

In food allergy prevention, diagnosis, and management, multiple preference-sensitive options exist for patients where SDM may be used during allergy consultations, alongside decision aids. Decision aids are tools that assist and support patients during the SDM process, by supplementing the patient-physician interaction.

Where are the inequalities in ovarian cancer care in a country with universal healthcare? A systematic review and narrative synthesis

INTRODUCTION

Patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer from more deprived areas may face barriers to accessing timely, quality healthcare. We evaluated the literature for any association between socioeconomic group, treatments received and hospital delay among patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer in the United Kingdom, a country with universal healthcare.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, SCIE, AMED, PsycINFO and HMIC from inception to January 2023. Forward and backward citation searches were conducted. Two reviewers independently reviewed titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. UK-based studies were included if they reported socioeconomic measures and an association with either treatments received or hospital delay. The inclusion of studies from one country ensured greater comparability. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUIPS tool, and a narrative synthesis was conducted. The review is reported to PRISMA 2020 and registered with PROSPERO [CRD42022332071].

RESULTS

Out of 2876 references screened, ten were included. Eight studies evaluated treatments received, and two evaluated hospital delays. We consistently observed socioeconomic inequalities in the likelihood of surgery (range of odds ratios 0.24-0.99) and chemotherapy (range of odds ratios 0.70-0.99) among patients from the most, compared with the least, deprived areas. There were no associations between socioeconomic groups and hospital delay.

POLICY SUMMARY

Ovarian cancer treatments differed between socioeconomic groups despite the availability of universal healthcare. Further research is needed to understand why, though suggested reasons include patient choice, health literacy, and financial and employment factors. Qualitative research would provide a rich understanding of the complex factors that drive these inequalities.

Beyond satisfaction in person-centered pharmacy services

Patient self-reported satisfaction is commonly used as an assessment of service experience and quality for community pharmacy services. This commentary discusses alternative foundational approaches to evaluating service experience and quality in patient-centered care. It describes historical and recent literature pertaining to the development and use of satisfaction measures for service design and patient experience assessment. It then highlights potential limitations of patient satisfaction as an assessment tool for patient-centeredness and patient experience identified in the pharmacy literature, which include criticisms that use of patient satisfaction may compromise accuracy in measuring quality due to factors such as patients having poor knowledge of and low expectations for quality and having a predisposition toward rating satisfaction highly when experiencing no-cost and/or unfamiliar services. Moreover, satisfaction measurements may change based on service exposure, with patient preferences for service offerings changing with increased service exposure and variation in patient-specific and environmental factors. After discussing limitations and criticism of patient self-reported satisfaction, we introduce alternative assessments methods which may facilitate more accurate assessments of patient experience and patient-centered pharmacy services such as patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs), patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), and human-centered design techniques such as journey mapping, prototyping, and user testing to design and assess patient-centered pharmacy services. These alternative assessments are rooted in, or related to preferred implementation science approaches to establishing, evaluating, and sustaining pharmacy services.

Long-Term Care Preferences Among Chinese Older Adults: The Role of Sociocultural Factors

Understanding individuals' long-term care preferences is essential to the provision of person-centered care. This study aims to describe the preferences for long-term care settings and investigates sociocultural factors associated with long-term care preferences among older Chinese adults. Responses from 22,112 older adults aged 60 years or above were analyzed using multinomial logistic regression. Four ideal long-term care settings were identified: in-home care, community day care, institutional care, and undecided long-term care arrangements. The study found that the majority of participants desired to age in place at home, regardless of their health status and social support conditions. Therefore, research and advocacy efforts are needed to inform policymakers to strategically develop home-based long-term care supports in China.

The Influence of Patient Preference on Surgeons' Treatment Recommendations in the Management of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine whether surgeon variation in management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN) is driven by differences in risk perception and quantify surgeons' risk threshold for changing their recommendations.

BACKGROUND

Surgeons vary widely in management of IPMN.

METHODS

We conducted a survey of members of the Americas HepatoPancreatoBiliary Association, presented participants with 2 detailed clinical vignettes and asked them to choose between surgical resection and surveillance. We also asked them to judge the likelihood that the IPMN harbors cancer and that the patient would have a serious complication if surgery was performed. Finally, we asked surgeons to rate the level of cancer risk at which they would change their treatment recommendation. We examined the association between surgeons' treatment recommendations and their risk perception and risk threshold.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty surgeons participated in the study. Surgeons varied in their recommendations for surgery [19% for vignette 1 (V1) and 12% for V2] and in their perception of the cancer risk (interquartile range: 2%-10% for V1 and V2) and risk of surgical complications (V1 interquartile range: 10%-20%, V2 20%-30%). After adjusting for surgeon characteristics, surgeons who were above the median in cancer risk perception were 22 percentage points (27% vs. 5%) more likely to recommend resection than those who were below the median (95% CI: 11.34%; P <0.001). The median risk threshold at which surgeons would change their recommendation was 15% (V1 and V2). Surgeons who recommended surgery had a lower risk threshold for changing their recommendation than those who recommended surveillance (V1: 10.0 vs. 15.0, P =0.06; V2: 7.0 vs. 15.0, P =0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment that patients receive for IPMNs depends greatly on how their surgeons perceive the risk of cancer in the lesion. Efforts to improve cancer risk prediction for IPMNs may lead to decreased variations in care.

Validation of a Process for Shared Decision-Making in Pediatrics

OBJECTIVE

We sought to confirm, refute, or modify a 4-step process for implementing shared decision-making (SDM) in pediatrics that involves determining 1) if the decision includes >1 medically reasonable option; 2) if one option has a favorable medical benefit-burden ratio compared to other options; and 3) parents' preferences regarding the options; then 4) calibrating the SDM approach based on other relevant decision characteristics.

METHODS

We videotaped a purposive sample of pediatric inpatient and outpatient encounters at a single US children's hospital. Clinicians from 7 clinical services (craniofacial, neonatology, oncology, pulmonary, pediatric intensive care, hospital medicine, and sports medicine) were eligible. English-speaking parents of children who participated in inpatient family care conferences or outpatient problem-oriented encounters with participating clinicians were eligible. We conducted individual postencounter interviews with clinician and parent participants utilizing video-stimulated recall to facilitate reflection of decision-making that occurred during the encounter. We utilized direct content analysis with open coding of interview transcripts to determine the salience of the 4-step SDM process and identify themes that confirmed, refuted, or modified this process.

RESULTS

We videotaped 30 encounters and conducted 53 interviews. We found that clinicians' and parents' experiences of decision-making confirmed each SDM step. However, there was variation in the interpretation of each step and a need for flexibility in implementing the process depending on specific decisional contexts.

CONCLUSIONS

The 4-step SDM process for pediatrics appears to be salient and may benefit from further guidance about the interpretation of each step and contextual factors that support a modified approach.

A survey of surgical patients' perspectives and preferences towards general anesthesia techniques and shared-decision making

BACKGROUND

The decision about which type of general anesthetic to administer is typically made by the clinical team without patient engagement. This study examined patients' preferences, experiences, attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, and perceived social norms about anesthesia and about engaging in the decision regarding general anesthetic choice with their clinician.

METHODS

We conducted a survey in the United States, sent to a panel of surgical patients through Qualtrics (Qualtrics, Provo, UT) from March 2022 through May 2022. Questions were developed based on the Theory of Planned Behavior and validated measures were used when available. A patient partner who had experienced both intravenous and inhaled anesthesia contributed to the development and refinement of the questions.

RESULTS

A total of 806 patients who received general anesthesia for an elective procedure in the last five years completed the survey. 43% of respondents preferred a patient-led decision making role and 28% preferred to share decision making with their clinical team, yet only 7.8% reported being engaged in full shared decision making about the anesthesia they received. Intraoperative awareness, pain, nausea, vomiting and quickly returning to work and usual household activities were important to respondents. Waking up in the middle of surgery was the most commonly reported concern, despite this experience being reported only 8% of the time. Most patients (65%) who searched for information about general anesthesia noted that it took a lot of effort to find the information, and 53% agreed to feeling frustrated during the search.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients prefer a patient-led or shared decision making process when it comes to their anesthetic care and want to be engaged in the decision. However, only a small percentage of patients reported being fully engaged in the decision. Further studies should inform future shared decision-making tools, informed consent materials, educational materials and framing of anesthetic choices for patients so that they are able to make a choice regarding the anesthetic they receive.

The PCQ-Infertility Revised: A New Digital Instrument to Measure Treatment Satisfaction of Fertility Patients

Background

One of the key dimensions of healthcare quality is patient-centeredness, which represents how well healthcare is geared towards patients' needs and wishes. Many questionnaires that measure the patient-centeredness are long and complicated, eliciting non-response or careless responding. Moreover, responses to some commonly used questionnaires are difficult to interpret. The Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire-Infertility (PCQ-Infertility) is used to measure the patient's experience of fertility healthcare quality. The aim of this study was to improve the PCQ-Infertility to allow large-scale clinical implementation.

Methods

The study was performed in three parts. First, shortcomings of the original PCQ-Infertility were identified by evaluation of expert opinions. Second, the number of items were reduced, and items were rescaled and rephrased. Third, 844 patients filled in the original PCQ-Infertility and 260 patients filled in the revised PCQ-Infertility and reliability analyses were performed. In addition, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed on the revised PCQ-Infertility.

Results

The number of items in the revised questionnaire was reduced by 24% (from 51 to 39 items), which increased the internal consistency and reliability. The reliability analyses and confirmatory factor analysis indicated high consistency and convergent validity in all seven dimensions (accessibility, information, communication, patient involvement, respect for patient's values, continuity and transition, and competence) of the revised PCQ-Infertility.

Conclusion

The revised PCQ-Infertility is a more valid and reliable instrument than the original PCQ-Infertility, easier to interpret and shorter. Therefore, large-scale clinical implementation and data analysis are now possible, giving the opportunity for fertility care professionals to evaluate and improve their healthcare.

Male patients' preferences for opioid use treatment programs

BACKGROUND

A patient-centered approach to the treatment of substance use is helpful in achieving positive treatment outcomes. This study aimed to explore male patients' preferences for opioid use treatments.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted in Isfahan, a city in the center of Iran. The study sample included 64 male participants who had started treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). Using a purposive maximum variation sampling procedure, seven treatment centers were selected as interview venues. The semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted in a private room in the selected centers. A hybrid inductive/deductive approach was used to thematize the interview transcripts.

RESULTS

A total of three themes and 13 subthemes on opioid treatment preferences were identified: treatment concerns (anonymity, social stigma, fear of treatment distress, and family concerns), treatment attributes (treatment cost, location of the treatment center, treatment period, frequency of attendance, informed treatment, and treatment personnel), and treatment type (maintenance or abstinence and residential and community treatments). The study showed that all treatment programs were perceived to have their own strengths and weaknesses.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that patients with OUD carefully compare the positive and negative aspects of existing treatment programs, and they consider a treatment program to be a package of favorable and non-favorable qualities. The identified themes could inform policymakers about the treatment preferences of male patients and provide an opportunity to promote better treatment options for OUD.

Disclosure and consent: ensuring the ethical provision of information regarding childbirth

Ethical medical care of pregnant women in Australia should include the real provision of information regarding the risks and benefits of vaginal birth. Routinely obtaining consent for the different ways in which childbirth is commonly intervened on and the assistance involved (such as midwife-led care or a planned caesarean section) and providing sufficient information for women to evaluate the harms and benefits of the care on offer, would not only enable the empowerment of women but would align with the current standard of care as established by Rogers v Whittaker.

An Electronically Delivered Person-Centered Narrative Intervention for Persons Receiving Palliative Care: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

In the health care setting, electronic health records (EHRs) are one of the primary modes of communication about patients, but most of this information is clinician centered. There is a need to consider the patient as a person and integrate their perspectives into their health record. Incorporating a patient's narrative into the EHR provides an opportunity to communicate patients' cultural values and beliefs to the health care team and has the potential to improve patient-clinician communication. This paper describes the protocol to evaluate the integration of an adapted person-centered narrative intervention (PCNI). This adaptation builds on our previous research centered on the implementation of PCNIs. The adaptation for this study includes an all-electronic delivery of a PCNI in an outpatient clinical setting.

OBJECTIVE

This research protocol aims to evaluate the feasibility, usability, and effects of the all-electronic delivery of a PCNI in an outpatient setting on patient-reported outcomes. The first objective of this study is to identify the barriers and facilitators of an internet-based-delivered PCNI from the perspectives of persons living with serious illness and their clinicians. The second objective is to conduct acceptability, usability, and intervention fidelity testing to determine the essential requirements for the EHR integration of an internet-based-delivered PCNI. The third objective is to test the feasibility of the PCNI in an outpatient clinic setting.

METHODS

Using a mixed method design, this single-arm intervention feasibility study was delivered over approximately 3 to 4 weeks. Patient participant recruitment was conducted via screening outpatient palliative care clinic schedules weekly for upcoming new palliative care patient visits and then emailing potential patient participants to notify them about the study. The PCNI was delivered via email and Zoom app. Patient-reported outcome measures were completed by patient participants at baseline, 24 to 48 hours after PCNI, and after the initial palliative care clinic visit, approximately 1 month after baseline. Inclusion criteria included having the capacity to give consent and having an upcoming initial outpatient palliative care clinic visit.

RESULTS

The recruitment of participants began in April 2021. A total of 189 potential patient participants were approached via email, and 20 patient participants were enrolled, with data having been collected from May 2021 to September 2022. A total of 7 clinician participants were enrolled, with a total of 3 clinician exit interviews and 1 focus group (n=5), which was conducted in October 2022. Data analysis is expected to be completed by the end of June 2023.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this study, combined with those from other PCNI studies conducted in acute care settings, have the potential to influence clinical practices and policies and provide innovative avenues to integrate more person-centered care delivery.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/41787.

Incidence and trends of decision regret following elective hernia repair

BACKGROUND

One approach to evaluate decision-making is using the concept of decision regret, which measures patient remorse after a healthcare decision. This is particularly important for elective, preference-sensitive conditions with multiple treatment options, such as ventral and inguinal hernia repair. In this study, we assessed decision regret among patients who pursued surgical management of ventral and inguinal hernias.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed a statewide registry of adult patients who underwent elective ventral and inguinal hernia repair between January 2017 and March 2020 and completed a validated survey measuring decision regret. 30-day outcomes included complications, emergency department (ED) utilization, readmission, and reoperation. Multivariable logistic regression examined the association of regret with age, sex, race, insurance status, ASA, tobacco use, diabetes, admission status, surgical approach (open vs. laparoscopic vs. robotic), year, and outcomes.

RESULTS

8315 patients underwent surgery during the study period with a mean age of 60.5 (14.7) years and 1812 (22%) female patients. Among 2159 patients who underwent ventral hernia repair, 248 (11%) reported regret to undergo surgery, 64 (3%) experienced a complication, 160 (7%) visited an ED, 86 (4%) were readmitted, and 29 (1%) underwent reoperation. Outcomes associated with regret after ventral hernia repair included complications (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.26-4.29) and readmission (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.51-4.71). Among 6,156 patients who underwent inguinal hernia repair, 533 (9%) reported regret to undergo surgery, 41 (1%) experienced a complication, 304 (5%) visited an ED, 72 (1%) were readmitted, and 63 (1%) underwent reoperation. Outcomes associated with regret after inguinal hernia repair included ED visits (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.44-2.87) and readmission (OR 4.23, 95% CI 2.35-7.61).

CONCLUSION

Roughly 1 in 10 patients undergoing hernia repair report regret with their decision to undergo surgery. Developing a better understanding of the factors associated with decision regret after hernia repair may better inform both patients and surgeon decision-making.

Developing the Breast Utility Instrument to Measure Health-Related Quality-of-Life Preferences in Patients with Breast Cancer: Selecting the Item for Each Dimension

Introduction. Generic preference-based instruments inadequately measure breast cancer (BrC) health-related quality-of-life preferences given advances in therapy. Our overall purpose is to develop the Breast Utility Instrument (BUI), a BrC-specific preference-based instrument. This study describes the selection of the BUI items. Methods. A total of 408 patients from diverse BrC health states completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and BR45 (breast module). For each of 10 dimensions previously assessed with confirmatory factor analysis, we evaluated data fit to the Rasch model based on global model and item fit, including threshold ordering, item residuals, infit and outfit, differential item functioning (age), and unidimensionality. Misfitting items were removed iteratively, and the model fit was reassessed. From items fitting the Rasch model, we selected 1 item per dimension based on high patient- and clinician-rated item importance, breadth of item thresholds, and clinical relevance. Results. Global model fit was good in 7 and borderline in 3 dimensions. Separation index was acceptable in 4 dimensions. Item selection criteria were maximized for the following items: 1) physical functioning (trouble taking a long walk), 2) emotional functioning (worry), 3) social functioning (interfering with social activities), 4) pain (having pain), 5) fatigue (tired), 6) body image (dissatisfied with your body), 7) systemic therapy side effects (hair loss), 8) sexual functioning (interest in sex), 9) breast symptoms (oversensitive breast), and 10) endocrine therapy symptoms (problems with your joints). Conclusions. We propose 10 items for the BUI. Our next steps include assessing the measurement properties prior to eliciting preference weights of the BUI.

Highlights

A previous confirmatory factor analysis established 10 dimensions of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core quality of life questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and its breast module (BR45). In this study, we selected 1 item per dimension based on fit to the Rasch model, patient- and clinician-rated item importance, breadth of item thresholds, and clinical relevance. These items form the core of the future Breast Utility Instrument (BUI). The future BUI will be a novel breast cancer–specific preference-based instrument that potentially will better reflect women’s preferences in clinical decision making and cost utility analyses.

The Effect of Number and Distribution of Mini Dental Implants on Overdenture Stability: An In Vitro Study

The rotational movement of mini dental implants (MDIs) overdenture disturbs the function of the prosthesis. Many dentists place more MDIs to improve the overdenture stability; however, the influence of the MDIs number and distribution on the overdenture resistance to para-axial dislodgment has not been investigated. Seven resin models simulating atrophic mandibles housed twenty MDIs placed according to seven arrangements. Acrylic overdentures were fabricated for each cast and were dislodged five times in lateral, anterior and posterior directions, and the peak load dislodgment was measured. Each overdenture underwent 540 axial removal/placement cycles. The para-axial dislodgments were measured again, and data were compared. Dislodgment force values were measured in all directions, and the data were analysed using analysis of variance ANOVA and post hoc (p < 0.05). After six months of simulated placement/removal, increasing the MDI number showed a difference in resistance to para-axial dislodgment. The distribution affected the resistance to dislodgment in some directions. The inter-implant distance of 27 mm provided better resistance to posterior dislodgment than placing two MDIs close together at 19 mm. The placement of three MDIs at any distribution showed no significant difference except for resistance to posterior dislodgment. FourMDIs placed at any distribution showed a significant difference in all groups in all tested directions. The resistance to the para-axial dislodgment of MDI overdenture could improve with the increasing MDIs number and careful planning of MDI distribution.

Pretransplant Patient Education in Solid-organ Transplant: A Narrative Review

Education for pretransplant, solid-organ recipient candidates aims to improve knowledge and understanding about the transplant process, outcomes, and potential complications to support informed, shared decision-making to reduce fears and anxieties about transplant, inform expectations, and facilitate adjustment to posttransplant life. In this review, we summarize novel pretransplant initiatives and approaches to educate solid-organ transplant recipient candidates. First, we review approaches that may be common to all solid-organ transplants, then we summarize interventions specific to kidney, liver, lung, and heart transplant. We describe evidence that emphasizes the need for multidisciplinary approaches to transplant education. We also summarize initiatives that consider online (eHealth) and mobile (mHealth) solutions. Finally, we highlight education initiatives that support racialized or otherwise marginalized communities to improve equitable access to solid-organ transplant. A considerable amount of work has been done in solid-organ transplant since the early 2000s with promising results. However, many studies on education for pretransplant recipient candidates involve relatively small samples and nonrandomized designs and focus on short-term surrogate outcomes. Overall, many of these studies have a high risk of bias. Frequently, interventions assessed are not well characterized or they are combined with administrative and data-driven initiatives into multifaceted interventions, which makes it difficult to assess the impact of the education component on outcomes. In the future, well-designed studies rigorously assessing well-defined surrogate and clinical outcomes will be needed to evaluate the impact of many promising initiatives.

Implant-based Breast Reconstruction after Mastectomy for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Women undergoing implant-based reconstruction (IBR) after mastectomy for breast cancer have numerous options, including timing of IBR relative to radiation and chemotherapy, implant materials, anatomic planes, and use of human acellular dermal matrices. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate these options.

Methods

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies, from inception to March 23, 2021, without language restriction. We assessed risk of bias and strength of evidence (SoE) using standard methods.

Results

We screened 15,936 citations. Thirty-six mostly high or moderate risk of bias studies (48,419 patients) met criteria. Timing of IBR before or after radiation may result in comparable physical, psychosocial, and sexual well-being, and satisfaction with breasts (all low SoE), and probably comparable risks of implant failure/loss or explantation (moderate SoE). No studies addressed timing relative to chemotherapy. Silicone and saline implants may result in clinically comparable satisfaction with breasts (low SoE). Whether the implant is in the prepectoral or total submuscular plane may not impact risk of infections (low SoE). Acellular dermal matrix use probably increases the risk of implant failure/loss or need for explant surgery (moderate SoE) and may increase the risk of infections (low SoE). Risks of seroma and unplanned repeat surgeries for revision are probably comparable (moderate SoE), and risk of necrosis may be comparable with or without human acellular dermal matrices (low SoE).

Conclusions

Evidence regarding IBR options is mostly of low SoE. New high-quality research is needed, especially for timing, implant materials, and anatomic planes of implant placement.

Implant-based versus Autologous Reconstruction after Mastectomy for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

For women undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy, the comparative benefits and harms of implant-based reconstruction (IBR) and autologous reconstruction (AR) are not well known. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of IBR versus AR after mastectomy for breast cancer.

Methods

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies from inception to March 23, 2021. We assessed the risk of bias of individual studies and strength of evidence (SoE) of our findings using standard methods.

Results

We screened 15,936 citations and included 40 studies (two randomized controlled trials and 38 adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies). Compared with patients who undergo IBR, those who undergo AR experience clinically significant better sexual well-being [summary adjusted mean difference (adjMD) 5.8, 95% CI 3.4-8.2; three studies] and satisfaction with breasts (summary adjMD 8.1, 95% CI 6.1-10.1; three studies) (moderate SoE for both outcomes). AR was associated with a greater risk of venous thromboembolism (moderate SoE), but IBR was associated with a greater risk of reconstructive failure (moderate SoE) and seroma (low SoE) in long-term follow-up (1.5-4 years). Other outcomes were comparable between groups, or the evidence was insufficient to merit conclusions.

Conclusions

Most evidence regarding IBR versus AR is of low or moderate SoE. AR is probably associated with better sexual well-being and satisfaction with breasts and lower risks of seroma and long-term reconstructive failure but a higher risk of thromboembolic events. New high-quality research is needed to address the important research gaps.

The impact of patient narratives on medical students' perceptions of shared decision making: A randomized controlled trial

Successful shared decision making (SDM) in clinical practice requires that future clinicians learn to appreciate the value of patient participation as early as they can in their medical training. Narratives, such as patient testimonials, have been successfully used to support patients' decision-making process. Previous research suggests that narratives may also be used for increasing clinicians' empathy and responsiveness in medical consultations. However, so far, no studies have investigated the benefits of narratives for conveying the relevance of SDM to medical students. In this randomized controlled experiment, N = 167 medical students were put into a scenario where they prepared for medical consultation with a patient having Parkinson disease. After receiving general information, participants read either a narrative testimonial of a Parkinson patient or a fact-based information text. We measured their perceptions of SDM, their control preferences (i.e., their priorities as to who should make the decision), and the time they intended to spend for the consultation. Participants in the narrative patient testimonial condition referred more strongly to the patient as the one who should make decisions than participants who read the information text. Participants who read the patient narrative also considered SDM in situations with several equivalent treatment options to be more important than participants in the information text condition. There were no group differences regarding their control preferences. Participants who read the patient testimonial indicated that they would schedule more time for the consultation. These findings show that narratives can potentially be useful for imparting the relevance of SDM and patient-centered values to medical students. We discuss possible causes of this effect and implications for training and future research. Trial registration: The study was pre-registered on the pre-registration platform AsPredicted (aspredicted.org) before data collection began (registration number: #29,342). Date of registration: 17 October 2019.

The Need for Brevity During Shared Decision Making (SDM) for Cancer Screening: Veterans' Perspectives on an "Everyday SDM" Compromise

Introduction. Detailed or “full” shared decision making (SDM) about cancer screening is difficult in the primary care setting. Time spent discussing cancer screening is time not spent on other important issues. Given time constraints, brief SDM that is incomplete but addresses key elements may be feasible and acceptable. However, little is known about how patients feel about abbreviated SDM. This study assessed patient perspectives on a compromise solution (“everyday SDM”): 1) primary care provided makes a tailored recommendation, 2) briefly presents qualitative information on key tradeoffs, and 3) conveys full support for decisional autonomy and desires for more information. Methods. We recruited a stratified random sample of Veterans from an academic Veterans Affairs medical center who were eligible for lung cancer screening, oversampling women and minority patients, to attend a 6-hour deliberative focus group. Experts informed participants about cancer screening, factors that influence screening benefits, and the role of patient preferences. Then, facilitator-led small groups elicited patient questions and informed opinions about the everyday SDM proposal, its acceptability, and their recommendations for improvement. Results. Thirty-six Veterans with a heavy smoking history participated (50% male, 83% white). There was a strong consensus that everyday SDM was acceptable if patients were the final deciders and could get more information on request. Participants broadly recommended that clinicians only mention downsides directly related to screening and avoid discussion of potential downstream harms (such as biopsies). Discussion. Although further testing in more diverse populations and different conditions is needed, these patients found the everyday SDM approach to be acceptable for routine lung cancer screening discussions, despite its use of an explicit recommendation and presentation of only qualitative information.

The Risk of Allergic Reaction to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines and Recommended Evaluation and Management: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, GRADE Assessment, and International Consensus Approach

Concerns for anaphylaxis may hamper severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunization efforts. We convened a multidisciplinary group of international experts in anaphylaxis composed of allergy, infectious disease, emergency medicine, and front-line clinicians to systematically develop recommendations regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immediate allergic reactions. Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, the World Health Organizstion (WHO) global coronavirus database, and the gray literature (inception, March 19, 2021) were systematically searched. Paired reviewers independently selected studies addressing anaphylaxis after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polysorbate allergy, and accuracy of allergy testing for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine allergy. Random effects models synthesized the data to inform recommendations based on the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, agreed upon using a modified Delphi panel. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine anaphylaxis is 7.91 cases per million (n = 41,000,000 vaccinations; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 4.02-15.59; 26 studies, moderate certainty), the incidence of 0.15 cases per million patient-years (95% CI 0.11-0.2), and the sensitivity for PEG skin testing is poor, although specificity is high (15 studies, very low certainty). We recommend vaccination over either no vaccination or performing SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient screening allergy testing for individuals without history of a severe allergic reaction to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient, and a shared decision-making paradigm in consultation with an allergy specialist for individuals with a history of a severe allergic reaction to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient. We recommend further research to clarify SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/vaccine excipient testing utility in individuals potentially allergic to SARS-CoV2 vaccines or their excipients.

Caregiver perceptions and attitudes associated with oral immunotherapy on social media

Background: Caregiver values and preferences with regard to oral immunotherapy (OIT) for treatment of food allergies are not widely reported. Understanding caregiver perspectives is integral to establishing shared decision-making in the treatment of food allergy. Objective: We aimed to understand caregiver opinions that may influence caregivers in their decisions about OIT through social media. Methods: We searched a popular parenting web site for posts related to OIT from December 2008 to September 2019. We applied a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework to review posts for inclusion, performed thematic content analysis to determine common themes, and calculated frequencies for each theme and subtheme. Posts and comments were included if they contained discussions about OIT for immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergy and were excluded if they were duplicates, comments from an original post from the original user, or comments on a nonrelevant original post. Results: Of 1300 posts and comments retrieved, 174 were included (13%). Most were excluded because they did not directly address OIT for food allergy. Relevant posts could fall into multiple themes and were categorized under three main themes: attitudes (n = 128, "I am scared to do OIT but scared not to!"), logistics (n = 168, "We will be doing this once LO [little one] is a little older"), and questions (n = 32, "How does it work?"). Conclusion: Caregivers communicate with each other through social media, expressing attitudes, logistics, and questions about OIT. Understanding these lay perspectives may help guide clinicians in counseling and engage caregivers in decision-making.

Impact of health-related quality of life on repeat protocol biopsy compliance on active surveillance for favorable prostate cancer: results from a prospective cohort in the PRIAS-JAPAN study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate how health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is related to repeat protocol biopsy compliance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis using data from a prospective cohort in the Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS)-JAPAN study between January 2010 and August 2019. We used the Short Form 8 Health Survey (SF-8), as patient-reported outcomes, to assess HRQOL at AS enrollment and the first year of the protocol. The physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) were calculated from SF-8 questionnaires. The primary outcome was the evaluation of the association of HRQOL at enrollment on the first repeat biopsy compliance. The secondary outcome was the comparison of SF-8 scores during AS, stratified by repeat protocol biopsy compliance.

RESULTS

Of 805 patients who proceeded to the first year of the protocol, the non-compliance rate was 15% (121 patients). In the adjusted model, lower MCS at enrollment was significantly associated with the first repeat protocol biopsy non-compliance (odds ratio [OR], 2.134; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.031-4.42; P = 0.041) but not in lower PCS (OR, 0.667; 95% CI, 0.294-1.514; P = 0.333). All subscales of SF-8 were lower in the non-compliance group than in the compliance group at any point. MCS in the non-compliance group improved over time from the time of AS enrollment (2.34 increased, P = 0.152).

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that lower MCS at AS enrollment using patient-reported outcomes was negatively associated with the first repeat protocol biopsy compliance. Our study may support the availability of a simple questionnaire to extract non-compliance.

Temporal Trends in Case Fatality, Discharge Destination, and Admission to Long-term Care After Acute Stroke

OBJECTIVE

To determine contemporary trends in case fatality, discharge destination, and admission to long-term care after acute ischemic stroke and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) using a large, population-based cohort.

METHODS

We used linked administrative data to identify all emergency department visits and hospital admissions for first-ever ischemic stroke or ICH in Ontario, Canada, from 2003 to 2017. We calculated crude and age-/sex-standardized risk of death at 30 days and 1 year from stroke onset. We stratified crude trends by stroke type, age, and sex and used the Kendall τ-b correlation coefficient to evaluate the significance of trends. We determined trends in discharge home and to rehabilitation and admission to long-term care at 1 year. We used Cox proportional hazard and logistic regression models to assess whether trends in outcomes persisted after adjustment for baseline factors, estimated stroke severity, and use of life-sustaining care.

RESULTS

There were 163,574 people with acute ischemic stroke or ICH across the study period. Between 2003 and 2017, age-/sex-standardized 30-day stroke case fatality decreased from 20.5% to 13.2% (7.3% absolute and 36% relative reduction) while that at 1 year decreased from 32.2% to 22.8% (9.3% absolute and 29% relative reduction). Findings were consistent across age, sex, and stroke type, and after adjustment for comorbid conditions, stroke severity, and use of life-sustaining care. There was a reduction in long-term care admission after ischemic stroke and an increase in discharge home or to rehabilitation for both stroke types.

CONCLUSION

We observed substantial reductions in acute stroke case fatality from 2003 to 2017 with a concurrent increase in discharge to home or rehabilitation and a decrease in long-term care admissions, suggesting continuous improvements in stroke systems of care.

Evidence-Based Medicine in Otolaryngology Part XII: Assessing Patient Preferences

OBJECTIVE

To provide a contemporary resource to update clinicians and researchers on the current state of assessment of patient preferences.

DATA SOURCES

Published studies and literature regarding patient preferences, evidence-based practice, and patient-centered management in otolaryngology.

REVIEW METHODS

Patients make choices based on both physician input and their own preferences. These preferences are informed by personal values and attitudes, and they ideally result from a deliberative evaluation of the risks, benefits, and other outcomes pertaining to medical care. To date, rigorous evaluation of patient preferences for otolaryngologic conditions has not been integrated into clinical practice or research. This installment of the "Evidence-Based Medicine in Otolaryngology" series focuses on formal assessment of patient preferences and the optimal methods to determine them.

CONCLUSIONS

Methods have been developed to optimize our understanding of patient preferences.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Understanding these patient preferences may help promote an evidence-based approach to the care of individual patients.

Evidence-Based Decision Aid for Patients With Parkinson Disease: Protocol for Interview Study, Online Survey, and Two Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making is particularly important in situations with different treatment alternatives. For the treatment of idiopathic Parkinson disease, both pharmacological and surgical approaches can be applied.

OBJECTIVE

In this research project, a series of studies will be conducted to investigate how decision aids for patients with idiopathic Parkinson disease should be designed in order to support the decision-making process.

METHODS

In Study 1a, qualitative interviews will be conducted to determine which needs frequently occur for patients with idiopathic Parkinson disease. In Study 1b, the identified needs will then be rated for personal relevance by an independent group of patients in an online survey. In Study 2, a randomized controlled trial will be used to pretest different decision aids in a sample group of people who do not have a medical background and who do not have Parkinson disease. In Study 3, a randomized controlled trial will be used to investigate the effect of the decision aids that had been evaluated as positive in Study 2 with patients who have idiopathic Parkinson disease.

RESULTS

This series of studies received ethical approval in January 2020. As of June 2020, data collection for Study 1a has started, and it is estimated that Studies 1a, 1b, 2, and 3 will take approximately 4, 4, 6, and 6 months to complete, respectively. It is planned to present the results and analyses at international conferences and to submit the results to peer-reviewed journals for publication, once the studies have been completed. The findings will also be shared with clinicians and patients through presentations at information events.

CONCLUSIONS

This series of studies is intended to result in an evidence-based decision aid for patients with idiopathic Parkinson disease in order to support the informed and reflected shared decision-making process. We further intend to contribute to a deeper understanding of the individual preferences of patients with idiopathic Parkinson disease and the impact of those preferences on treatment decisions.

A review of shared decision-making: A call to arms for health care professionals

OBJECTIVE

To illustrate the use of shared decision-making (SDM) and SDM tools and aids as the essential components in the care of asthma.

DATA SOURCES

We reviewed individual randomized controlled studies conducted between 1998 and 2020 to compare SDM interventions and the use of SDM tools and aids for the care of asthma. All studies were published or translated in English.

STUDY SELECTIONS

We excluded studies of interventions that involved multiple components other than the SDM intervention unless the control group also received these interventions. We evaluated the existing literature on both SDM tools and aids and the process of SDM to summarize in this review.

RESULTS

Shared decision-making tools and aids most commonly clarify the diagnostics and options for a treatment. The 6 elements of SDM were clearly supported. We found no considerable association between the presence of these elements of SDM and asthma outcomes.

CONCLUSION

We found that SDM for asthma and SDM tools and aids were often made to transfer information about asthma treatment options and their harms and benefits. The correlation between their support of SDM key elements and their impact on asthma outcomes is often difficult to ascertain but when present, there was positive correlation to improving risk communication, adherence, patient satisfaction, and possibly decreasing liability.

Patients with psychiatric illness report worse patient-reported outcomes and receive lower rates of autologous breast reconstruction

Psychiatric well-being impacts on general satisfaction and quality of life. This study explored how the presence of psychiatric diagnoses affects patient-reported outcomes in breast reconstruction and on selection of reconstructive modality. Patients who received breast reconstruction at a tertiary hospital between 2013 and 2018 and completed the BREAST-Q survey were included. BREAST-Q module scores were compared between patients who had a psychiatric diagnosis at presentation and the remaining cohort using t tests. General linear models (GLMs) were used to control for confounding factors. A chi-squared test was used to assess the effect on reconstructive modality, and binary logistic regression was used to control for confounding factors. Of the 471 patients included, 93 (19.7%) had at least one psychiatric diagnosis. Cohorts did not differ significantly by age, BMI, race, ASA classification, or insurance status. Patients with a psychiatric diagnosis experienced a decrease in BREAST-Q scores for the Psychosocial Wellbeing (B = 9.16, P = .001) and Sexual Wellbeing (B = 9.29, P = .025) modules. On binary logistic regression, patients with a psychiatric diagnosis were less likely to receive autologous reconstruction compared with implant reconstruction (OR = 0.489, P = .010). The presence of psychiatric diagnoses is an independent predictor of decreased BREAST-Q. Furthermore, there is a significant disparity in modality of reconstruction given to patients with psychiatric diagnoses. Further study is needed to evaluate interventions to improve satisfaction among at-risk populations and evaluate the reason for low autologous reconstruction in this population.

Shared decision-making in the care of a patient with food allergy

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision-making is a patient-centered approach that involves a mutual discussion about management or treatment options, which account for the patient's underlying values and preferences for therapy. Little is known about the role of shared decision-making in the care of patients with food allergy.

DATA SOURCES

A narrative review of the shared decision-making and food allergy outcomes literature in the past 20 years was performed.

RESULTS

In shared decision-making, care must be taken to help clarify the patient's values regarding their care options, but not instill the clinician's values or preferences into that choice. It is essential to understand the mutual roles of the clinician in the process of providing evidence-based options for care, advocating for treatments that are aligned with their goals and preferences, and allowing patients to make fully informed decisions within this paradigm. Decision support tools such as decision aids can assist patients in the values clarification process, particularly in which preference-sensitive care exists, in which options hold significant tradeoffs and varying outcomes, and the decision is reflective of personal values and preferences. There are multiple potential preference-sensitive care scenarios in food allergy in which shared decision-making could be optimized, including the development of decision aids. These areas include early allergenic solid introduction, preemptive epinephrine use in which there is allergen exposure but no symptoms, automatic activation of EMS after using epinephrine, and choices of food allergy treatment. Only one decision aid in food allergy exists.

CONCLUSION

Shared decision-making is an approach that could greatly enhance food allergy care and improve patient-reported outcomes.

Decisional autonomy undermines advisees' judgments of experts in medicine and in life

Over the past several decades, the United States medical system has increasingly prioritized patient autonomy. Physicians routinely encourage patients to come to their own decisions about their medical care rather than providing patients with clearer yet more paternalistic advice. Although political theorists, bioethicists, and philosophers generally see this as a positive trend, the present research examines the important question of how patients and advisees in general react to full decisional autonomy when making difficult decisions under uncertainty. Across six experiments (N = 3,867), we find that advisers who give advisees decisional autonomy rather than offering paternalistic advice are judged to be less competent and less helpful. As a result, advisees are less likely to return to and recommend these advisers and pay them lower wages. Importantly, we also demonstrate that advisers do not anticipate these effects. We document these results both inside and outside the medical domain, suggesting that the preference for paternalism is not unique to medicine but rather is a feature of situations in which there are adviser-advisee asymmetries in expertise. We find that the preference for paternalism holds when advice is solicited or unsolicited, when both paternalism and autonomy are accompanied by expert guidance, and it persists both before and after the outcomes of paternalistic advice are realized. Lastly, we see that the preference for paternalism only occurs when decision makers perceive their decision to be difficult. These results challenge the benefits of recently adopted practices in medical decision making that prioritize full decisional autonomy.

Treatability Statements in Serious Illness: The Gap Between What is Said and What is Heard

Empirical work has shown that patients and physicians have markedly divergent understandings of treatability statements (e.g., "This is a treatable condition," "We have treatments for your loved one") in the context of serious illness. Patients often understand treatability statements as conveying good news for prognosis and quality of life. In contrast, physicians often do not intend treatability statements to convey improvement in prognosis or quality of life, but merely that a treatment is available. Similarly, patients often understand treatability statements as conveying encouragement to hope and pursue further treatment, though this may not be intended by physicians. This radical divergence in understandings may lead to severe miscommunication. This paper seeks to better understand this divergence through linguistic theory-in particular, H.P. Grice's notion of conversational implicature. This theoretical approach reveals three levels of meaning of treatability statements: (1) the literal meaning, (2) the physician's intended meaning, and (3) the patient's received meaning. The divergence between the physician's intended meaning and the patient's received meaning can be understood to arise from the lack of shared experience between physicians and patients, and the differing assumptions that each party makes about conversations. This divergence in meaning raises new and largely unidentified challenges to informed consent and shared decision making in the context of serious illness, which indicates a need for further empirical research in this area.

Importance of quality-of-life priorities and preferences surrounding treatment decision making in patients with cancer and oncology clinicians

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) occurs when a patient partners with their oncologist to integrate personal preferences and values into treatment decisions. A key component of SDM is the elicitation of patient preferences and values, yet little is known about how and when these are elicited, communicated, prioritized, and documented within clinical encounters.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study evaluated nationwide data collected by CancerCare to better understand current patterns of SDM between patients and their oncology clinicians. Patient surveys included questions about the importance of quality-of-life preferences and discussions regarding quality-of-life priorities with their clinicians. Clinician surveys included questions about the discussion of quality-of-life priorities and preferences with patients, the effect of quality-of-life priorities on treatment recommendations, and quality-of-life priority documentation in practice.

RESULTS

Patient survey completers (n = 320; 33% response rate) were predominantly women (95%), had a diagnosis of breast cancer (59%), or were receiving active cancer treatment (59%). Clinician survey completers (n = 112; 5% response rate) predominately identified as hematologists or oncologists (66%). Although 67% of clinicians reported knowing their patients' personal quality-of-life priorities and preferences before finalizing treatment plans, only 37% of patients reported that these discussions occurred before treatment initiation. Most patients (95%) considered out-of-pocket expenses important during treatment planning, yet only 59% reported discussing out-of-pocket expenses with their clinician before finalizing treatment plans. A majority of clinicians (52%) considered clinic questionnaires as feasible to document quality-of-life priorities and preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and clinicians reported that preferences related to quality-of-life should be considered in treatment decision making, yet barriers to SDM, preference elicitation, and documentation remain.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating the BREASTChoice Tool for Personalized Decision Support About Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a web-based breast reconstruction decision aid, BREASTChoice.

SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA

Although postmastectomy breast reconstruction can restore quality of life and body image, its morbidity remains substantial. Many patients lack adequate knowledge to make informed choices. Decisions are often discordant with patients' preferences.

METHODS

Adult women with stages 0-III breast cancer considering postmastectomy breast reconstruction with no previous reconstruction were randomized to BREASTChoice or enhanced usual care (EUC).

RESULTS

Three hundred seventy-six patients were screened; 120 of 172 (69.8%) eligible patients enrolled. Mean age = 50.7 years (range 25-77). Most were Non-Hispanic White (86.3%) and had a college degree (64.3%). Controlling for health literacy and provider seen, BREASTChoice users had higher knowledge than those in EUC (84.6% vs. 58.2% questions correct; P < 0.001). Those using BREASTChoice were more likely to know that reconstruction typically requires more than 1 surgery, delayed reconstruction lowers one's risk, and implants may need replacement over time (all ps < 0.002). BREASTChoice compared to EUC participants also felt more confident understanding reconstruction information (P = 0.009). There were no differences between groups in decisional conflict, decision process quality, shared decision-making, quality of life, or preferences (all ps > 0.05). There were no differences in consultation length between BREASTChoice and EUC groups (mean = 29.7 vs. 30.0 minutes; P > 0.05). BREASTChoice had high usability (mean score = 6.3/7). Participants completed BREASTChoice in about 27 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

BREASTChoice can improve breast reconstruction decision quality by improving patients' knowledge and providing them with personalized risk estimates. More research is needed to facilitate point-of-care decision support and examine BREASTChoice's impact on patients' decisions over time.

Development and acceptability of a shared decision-making tool for commercial peanut allergy therapies

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is the process through which patients and their medical provider mutually explore therapy goals, risk/benefit, and treatment options regarding medical care. Decision aids are tools that aid in the process of values clarification and help assess decisional needs and potential decisional conflicts.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and assess acceptability of a decision aid for commercial peanut allergy therapies.

METHODS

The creation of this decision aid occurred in 3 stages, including a qualitative study to assess decisional needs, development of a draft decision aid through multiple iterations in accordance with international guidelines and decision aid experts, and assessment of decisional acceptability, decisional conflict, and decisional self-efficacy related to using the decision aid.

RESULTS

The decision aid went through 9 iterations, resulting in a 4-page aid with 7 parts, explaining the therapies, key risks and benefits of therapy choices, relative importance of key attributes of the therapies, and a self-check assessment regarding informational adequacy and how to take the next steps. A total of 24 subjects assessed the decision aid, noting it had good acceptability, high decisional self-efficacy (mean score 91.9/100), and low decisional conflict (mean score 20.2/100). Respondents rated the information content as adequate and sufficient and the information regarding the therapy choices as fair and balanced without a clear bias or presenting a "best choice."

CONCLUSION

We have developed this decision aid as a tool to help caregivers navigate the complexity of decision making for peanut allergy treatment options. The decision aid was noted to have good acceptability, with scores reflective of the instrument enhancing decisional self-efficacy and reducing decisional conflict.

Perceptions and preferences for long-acting injectable and implantable medications in comparison to short-acting medications for opioid use disorders

Aim

Treatment for opioid use disorders has recently evolved to include long-acting injectable and implantable formulations of medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD). Incorporating patient preferences into treatment for substance use disorders is associated with increased motivation and treatment satisfaction. This study sought to assess treatment preferences for long-acting injectable and implantable MOUD as compared to short-acting formulations among individuals with OUD.

Methods

We conducted qualitative, semi-structured telephone interviews with forty adults recruited from across the United States through Craigslist advertisements and flyers posted in treatment programs. Eligible participants scored a two or greater on the heroin or opioid pain reliever sections of the Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription Medications, and Other Substances (TAPS) Tool, indicative of a past-year OUD. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and thematically analyzed.

Results

Twenty-four participants (60%) currently or previously had been prescribed MOUD. Sixteen participants (40%) expressed general opposition to MOUD, citing concerns that MOUD is purely financial gain for pharmaceutical companies and/or a "band aid" solution replacing one drug with another, rather than a path to abstinence. Some participants expressed personal preference for long-acting injectable (n = 16/40: 40%) and implantable formulations (n = 12/40: 30%) over short-acting formulations. About half of the participants were not willing to use injectables (n = 19/40: 48%) or implantables (n = 22/40: 55%), preferring short-acting formulations. Mixed evaluations of long- and short-acting MOUD focused on considerations of medication-related beliefs (privacy, concern over an embedded foreign body), the medication-related burden (convenience, provision of structure and support, medication administration, potential side effects), and medication-taking practices (potential for non-prescribed use, control over dosage, and duration of treatment).

Conclusions

Though many participants personally prefer short-acting to long-acting MOUD, some were open to including long-acting formulations in the range of options for those with OUD. Participants felt long-acting formulations may reduce medication-related burden and the risk of diversion. Conversely, participants expressed concern about invasive administration and loss of control over their treatment. Results suggest support for expanded access to a variety of formulations of MOUD. The use of shared decision making may also help patients select the formulation best aligned with their experiences, values, and treatment goals.

Online survey to assess parents' experience and preferences for follow-up visits for children living with type 1 diabetes in Quebec, Canada: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

It is accepted that although patients may initiate a visit to a healthcare provider, follow-up visits are often based on recommendations from providers. This suggests that follow-up care, since not initiated by patients, may not reflect patients' perception of a need for care. However, few studies have examined the burden of regular follow-up care and patients' perceived value of such care. For parents of children with type 1 diabetes (T1D), follow-up visits are scheduled regardless of how well controlled the diabetes is. Our study examines how benefits and burden from the parents' perspective could affect their preferences in regard to the frequency of regular follow-up care.

METHODS

We aim to develop an online patient survey to be distributed to parents of children living with T1D in the province of Quebec, Canada. The survey will be available in French and English, and distributed through diabetes clinics, on social media groups and forums for parents of children with T1D. The survey will be developed in collaboration with parents of children with T1D to ensure that it appropriately reflects the services in regular follow-up care and that the language is understandable and clear.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

All participants will be informed of the requirements and objectives of the survey at the beginning of the questionnaire and that the data collected will remain anonymous and confidential. Ethics approval for the study was obtained from the research ethics committee of the CHU de Québec-Université Laval. Results of the study will be shared with relevant stakeholders with the aim of improving practices and better meeting patients' and families' needs.

The Role of Shared Decision Making in Pediatric Food Allergy Management

Shared decision making was first highlighted in a report by the Institute of Medicine in 2001. The primary aim of this initiative was to improve the quality of care provided to patients in the United States by creating a health care system that is safe, effective, efficient, and equitable. Currently, medical decision making is based on a patient-centered approach, with the individual's preferences, needs, and values guiding optimal care. Patients are frequently faced with various treatment choices with no absolute guarantee of any desired outcome and no clear indication of the "best or least worse" option. In fact, in healthcare, each of these options usually has potential trade-offs and outcomes. The process of how to choose a particular option becomes a discussion where the clinician and the patient have to jointly review the medical evidence, but also the patient's openness and preference for balancing particular attributes of the treatment (both positive and negative). Shared decision making is important for chronic diseases that require long-term management, such as most allergic conditions, including food allergies. The landscape of food allergies has changed considerably in recent years with multiple and significant scientific advances in both diagnostics and treatment, providing an ideal field for the use of shared decision making. For the purposes of this review, we will discuss different areas of food allergy management within a single complex case, focusing on the role of shared decision making.

Practice variation among Dutch paediatricians in palivizumab prescription rates: the importance of parental counselling approach

AIM

To investigate differences in palivizumab prescription rates between Dutch paediatricians, and the role of parent counselling in this practice variation.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of premature infants <32 weeks of gestation, aged less than six months at the start of the winter season, born between January 2012 and July 2014, in three secondary hospital-based paediatric practices in the Netherlands.

RESULTS

We included 208 patients, 133 (64%) of whom received palivizumab. Prescription rates varied considerably between the three hospitals: 8% (6/64), 89% (32/36) and 99% (97/98). A noticeable difference in the way parents were counselled about palivizumab was the use of the number needed to treat (NNT). In the hospital with the lowest prescription rate (8%), an NNT of 20 to prevent one hospitalisation was explicitly discussed with parents. Bronchiolitis-related hospital admissions occurred in 11.3% of patients receiving palivizumab compared to 20.0% in nonimmunised infants (p = 0.086).

CONCLUSION

Considerable practice variation exists among Dutch paediatricians regarding palivizumab prescription rates. The counselling method seems to play an important role. Presenting palivizumab prophylaxis as a preference-sensitive decision, combined with the explicit use and explanation of an NNT, leads many parents to refrain from respiratory syncytial virus immunisation.

Gaps in the Implementation of Shared Decision-making: Illustrative Cases

Shared decision-making (SDM) has emerged as the preferred decision-making model in the clinician-patient relationship. Through collaboration, SDM helps to facilitate evidence-based medical decisions that are closely aligned with patient or surrogate preferences, values, and goals. How to implement SDM in clinical pediatric practice, however, remains elusive, in part because SDM in pediatrics is complicated by the involvement of parents as a special class of surrogate decision-maker. A provisional framework for the process of SDM in pediatrics was recently proposed by Opel to help facilitate its implementation. To identify aspects of the framework that require refinement, we applied it across a diverse range of clinical cases from multiple pediatric specialties. In doing so, several questions surfaced that deserve further scrutiny: (1) For which medical decisions is consideration of SDM required? (2) What is considered medically reasonable when there is variability in standard practice? (3) Can an option that is not consistent with standard practice still be medically reasonable? (4) How should public health implications be factored into SDM? (5) How should variability in preference sensitivity be approached? (6) How should the developing autonomy of adolescents be integrated into SDM?; and (7) How should SDM address parental decisional burden for emotionally charged decisions? We conduct a brief analysis of each question raised to illustrate key areas for future research.

Decision-making for people with dementia and advanced kidney disease: a secondary qualitative analysis of interviews from the Conservative Kidney Management Assessment of Practice Patterns Study

OBJECTIVE

To explore dialysis decision-making for adults who lack capacity due to cognitive impairment, a common and under-recognised condition in those with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD).

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of qualitative data collected during the Conservative Kidney Management Assessment of Practice Patterns Study programme of research was performed. Sixty semistructured interviews were conducted with multiprofessional team members from UK renal centres. Staff were asked about local facilities, the value of conservative kidney management (CKM), when and with whom CKM was discussed and how CKM could be improved. Thematic analysis was employed to identify, characterise and report on themes that emerged from the data, focused on the specific issues experienced by people with dementia.

SETTING

A purposive sample of nine UK renal centres differing in the scale of their CKM programmes.

PARTICIPANTS

Clinical directors of renal centres identified staff involved in CKM. Staff were asked to participate if they had experience of low clearance clinics or of caring for patients with advanced CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <20mL/min/1.73² or >65 years with end-stage kidney disease).

RESULTS

Two overarching themes were identified: factors taken into consideration during decision-making, and the process of decision-making itself. Comorbidity, social support, quality of life and the feasibility of dialysis were reported as factors pertinent to clinicians' decisions regarding suitability. The majority of renal centres practised multidisciplinary 'best interests' decision-making for those without capacity. Attitudes to advance care planning were divided.

CONCLUSIONS

In view of the prevalence of cognitive impairment among those with advanced CKD, we suggest consideration of routine assessment of cognition and capacity. In the UK, dialysis is initiated and continued for individuals with dementia and services should be adapted to meet the needs of this population.

A 4-Step Framework for Shared Decision-making in Pediatrics

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a well-established component of patient-centered care, and yet, its application in pediatrics is poorly understood. Common features of pediatric decision-making are not completely addressed in current SDM models, such as the fact that the principal SDM participant is the patient's surrogate, who, unlike competent adult patients deciding for themselves, has limitations on decision-making authority. To address this gap and improve the practice of SDM in pediatrics, a practical 4-step framework is presented. In step 1, physicians are posed the following question for any discrete decision: does the decision include >1 medically reasonable option? If the answer is no, SDM is not indicated. If the answer is yes, physicians proceed to step 2 and answer the following question: does 1 option have a favorable medical benefit-burden ratio compared with other options? If yes, physician-guided SDM is appropriate. If no, parent-guided SDM is appropriate. For each SDM approach, the physician proceeds to step 3 and answers the following question: how preference sensitive are the options? This helps to determine the specific SDM approach in step 4, which ranges from a strong or weak version of physician-guided SDM to a strong or weak version of parent-guided SDM. Several decisional characteristics, if present, can also help calibrate the version of SDM used. Additional analyses are needed to consider the inclusion of adolescents into this SDM framework.

The comparative effectiveness of decision aids in diverse populations with early stage prostate cancer: a study protocol for a cluster-randomized controlled trial in the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Alliance A191402CD

Background

Treatments for localized prostate cancer present challenging tradeoffs in the face of uncertain treatment benefits. These options are best weighed in a process of shared decision-making with the patient’s healthcare team. Minority men experience disparities in prostate cancer outcomes, possibly due in part to a lack of optimal communication during treatment selection. Decision aids facilitate shared decision-making, improve knowledge of treatment options, may increase satisfaction with treatment choice, and likely facilitate long-term quality of life.

Methods/design

This study will compare the effect of two evidence-based decision aids on patient knowledge and on quality of life measured one year after treatment, oversampling minority men. One decision aid will be administered prior to specialist consultation, preparing patients for a treatment discussion. The other decision aid will be administered within the consultation to facilitate transparent, preference-sensitive, and evidence-informed deliberations. The study will utilize a four-arm, block-randomized design to test whether each decision aid alone (Arms 1 and 2) or in combination (Arm 3) can improve patient knowledge and quality of life compared to usual care (Arm 4). The study, funded by the National Cancer Institute’s Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), will be deployed within select institutions that have demonstrated capacity to recruit minority populations into urologic oncology trials.

Discussion

Upon completion of the trial, we will have 1) tested the effectiveness of two evidence-based decision aids in enhancing patients’ knowledge of options for prostate cancer therapy and 2) estimated whether decision aids may improve patient quality of life one year after initial treatment choice.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03103321. The trial registration date (on ClinicalTrials.gov) was April 6, 2017.

An expanded framework to define and measure shared decision-making in dialogue: A 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' approach

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to develop a comprehensive, descriptive framework to measure shared decision making (SDM) in clinical encounters.

METHODS

We combined a top-down (theoretical) approach with a bottom-up approach based on audio-recorded dialogue to identify all communication processes related to decision making. We coded 55 pediatric otolaryngology visits using the framework and report interrater reliability.

RESULTS

We identified 14 clinician behaviors and 5 patient behaviors that have not been previously described, and developed a new SDM framework that is descriptive (what does happen) rather than normative (what should happen). Through the bottom-up approach we identified three broad domains not present in other SDM frameworks: socioemotional support, understandability of clinician dialogue, and recommendation-giving. We also specify the ways in which decision-making roles are assumed implicitly rather than discussed explicitly. Interrater reliability was >75% for 92% of the coded behaviors.

CONCLUSION/PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This SDM framework allows for a more expansive understanding and analysis of how decision making takes place in clinical encounters, including new domains and behaviors not present in existing measures. We hope that this new framework will bring attention to a broader conception of SDM and allow researchers to further explore the new domains and behaviors identified.

Sociodemographic variation in the use of chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with stage IV lung, oesophageal, stomach and pancreatic cancer: evidence from population-based data in England during 2013-2014

BACKGROUND

Sociodemographic inequalities in cancer treatment have been generally described, but there is little evidence regarding patients with advanced cancer. Understanding variation in the management of these patients may provide insights into likely mechanisms leading to inequalities in survival.

METHODS

We identified 50,232 patients with stage IV lung, oesophageal, pancreatic and stomach cancer from the English national cancer registry. A generalised linear model with a Poisson error structure was used to explore variation in radiotherapy and chemotherapy within 6 months from diagnosis by age, sex, deprivation, ethnicity, cancer site, comorbidity and, additionally, performance status.

RESULTS

There was substantial variation by cancer site, large gradients by age, and non-trivial associations with comorbidity and deprivation. After full adjustment, more deprived patients were consistently least likely to be treated with chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy and radiotherapy combined compared with less deprived patients with equally advanced disease stage (treatment rate ratio: 0.82 95% CI (0.78, 0.87) for CT, 0.78 95% CI (0.71, 0.85) for CTRT p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was marked variation in the management of patients with stage IV cancer. Routinely collected data could be used for surveillance across all cancers to help reduce treatment variation and optimise outcomes among patients with advanced cancer.

Stated preferences for long-term care: a literature review

Person-centred provision of long-term care (LTC) requires information on how individuals value respective LTC services. The literature on LTC preferences has not been comprehensively reviewed, existing summaries are contradictory. An explorative, scoping review was conducted to provide a thorough methodological description and results synthesis of studies that empirically investigated LTC preference outcomes based on respondents’ statements. A wide search strategy, with 18 key terms relating to ‘LTC’ and 31 to ‘preferences’, was developed. Database searches in PubMed, Ovid and ScienceDirect were conducted in February 2016. The 59 studies meeting the inclusion criteria were grouped and methodically described based on preference elicitation techniques and methods. Despite substantial methodological heterogeneity between studies, certain findings consistently emerged for the investigated LTC preference outcomes. The large majority of respondents preferred to receive LTC in their known physical and social environment when care needs were moderate, but residential care when care needs were extensive. Preferences were found to depend on a variety of personal, environmental, social and cultural aspects. Dependent individuals aspired to preserve their personal and social identity, self-image, independence, autonomy, control and dignity, which suggests that LTC preferences are a function of the perceived ability of a specific LTC arrangement to satisfy peoples’ basic physiological and mental/social needs. Research on LTC preferences would greatly profit from a standardisation of respective concepts and methods.