Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

Measuring decision aid effectiveness for end-of-life care: A systematic review

Objective

To systematically review research analyzing the effectiveness of decision aids for end-of-life care, including how researchers specifically measure decision aid success.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review synthesizing quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods study results using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Four databases were searched through February 18, 2023. Inclusion criteria required articles to evaluate end-of-life care decision aids. The review is registered under PROSPERO (#CRD42023408449).

Results

A total of 715 articles were initially identified, with 43 meeting the inclusion criteria. Outcome measures identified included decisional conflict, less aggressive care desired, knowledge improvements, communication improvements, tool satisfaction, patient anxiety and well-being, and less aggressive care action completed. The majority of studies reported positive outcomes especially when the decision aid development included International Patient Decision Aid Standards.

Conclusion

Research examining end of life care decision aid use consistently reports positive outcomes.

Innovation

This review presents data that can guide the next generation of decision aids for end-of-life care, namely using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards in developing tools and showing which tools are effective for helping to prevent the unnecessary suffering that can result when patients' dying preferences are unknown.

Have a vital end-user been overlooked? Developing a shared decision intervention for patients with potential pancreatic cancer regarding the choice of surgery

Objective

To develop a patient decision aid facilitating shared decision making for patients with potential pancreatic cancer deciding about no treatment, surgical or medical treatment.

Methods

Based on a user-centred design by Wittemann et al., we developed a shared decision making intervention in three phases: 1) Understanding decision needs 2) Development of a patient decision aid (PtDA) based on a generic template 3) Assessment of the intervention from interviews with patients (n = 11), relatives (n = 11), nurses (n = 4) and surgeons (n = 2) analysed with thematic analysis, and measuring patients' perceptions of choice of options with the Decisional Conflict Scale.

Results

Results showed varying experiences with the use of the PtDA, with surgeons not finding PtDA useful as it was impractical and constraining with patients' conversations. There was no difference in patients' perceptions in choosing options for those being presented vs those patients not being presented for the PtDA.

Conclusion

The format and structure of the PtDA was not feasible for the surgeons as fundamental users in the present clinic.

Innovation

This study highlights the urgent need to consider clinical context before introducing a predefined tool and shows the importance of a multistakeholder approach. Research should focus on finding means to successful implement shared decision making.

Feasibility and acceptability of chaplain decision coaching on Periviable resuscitation decision quality: A pilot study

Objective

To pilot test and assess the feasibility and acceptability of chaplain-led decision coaching alongside the GOALS (Getting Optimal Alignment around Life Support) decision support tool to enhance decision-making in threatened periviable delivery.

Methods

Pregnant people admitted for threatened periviable delivery and their 'important other' (IO) were enrolled. Decisional conflict, acceptability, and knowledge were measured before and after the intervention. Chaplains journaled their impressions of training and coaching encounters. Descriptive analysis and conventional content analysis were completed.

Results

Eight pregnant people and two IOs participated. Decisional conflict decreased by a mean of 6.7 (SD = 9.4) and knowledge increased by a mean of 1.4 (SD = 1.8). All rated their experience as "good" or "excellent," and the amount of information was "just right." Participants found it "helpful to have someone to talk to" and noted chaplains helped them reach a decision. Chaplains found the intervention a valuable use of their time and skillset.

Conclusion

This is the first small-scale pilot study to utilize chaplains as decision coaches. Our results suggest that chaplain coaching with a decision support tool is feasible and well-accepted by parents and chaplains.

Innovations

Our findings recognize chaplains as an underutilized, yet practical resource in value-laden clinical decision-making.

Predictors of knowledge and knowledge gain after decision aid use among women with BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors contributing to baseline knowledge in women with BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs) and knowledge gain after decision aid (DA) use.

METHODS

Women with PVs in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes were randomly assigned to an intervention group (IG) receiving DAs or a control group (CG). Of the total sample, 417 completed the baseline survey and were included in this analysis. Two multiple regression analyses were conducted: baseline data on socio-demographic, medical, decision-related and psychological variables were used to identify predictors for (1) baseline knowledge within the total group and (2) knowledge gain within the IG after DA use three months post study inclusion.

RESULTS

At baseline, higher education status, no breast cancer history, and lower decisional conflict related to higher knowledge within the total group. After DA use within the IG, higher baseline scores for decisional conflict predicted higher knowledge gain, and higher baseline scores for depression and intrusion predicted lower knowledge gain.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified predictors of baseline knowledge and knowledge gain after DA use in women with BRCA1/2 PVs.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Awareness of facilitating and hindering factors on these women's knowledge can improve understanding of their health literacy and enable further targeted support interventions.

The achievement of pre-operative expectations in patients undergoing knee arthroplasty: a cohort study evaluating unique patient goals

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a common procedure employed to treat end-stage osteoarthritis. While TKA is generally believed to have acceptable outcomes, many patients report pain or functional deficits not in line with their expectation following the procedure. It has been postulated that patient's pre-operative expectations regarding post-operative treatment outcomes play a significant role in satisfaction. It is therefore important to assess if the outcomes of surgery truly align with patient's individual expectations. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine the degree to which patient expectations of TKA are achieved and the contribution of TKA to achieving patient goals one year after surgery.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of 110 patients booked for total knee arthroplasty were asked to identify their most important goals to inform the Direct Questioning of Objectives Index (DQO Index, range 0 to 1) and identify their surgical goals and grade their expectation that a knee arthroplasty would achieve each goal on an 11-point scale. One year after surgery, the DQO Index was repeated to assess their current ability to achieve each pre-operative goal, and asked to estimate the contribution of their knee arthroplasty in achieving each goal. Mean differences between baseline and one year follow-up were calculated regarding the DQO Index and expected achievement of pre-operative goals.

RESULTS

According to the DQO Index at one year, patients improved from a poor quality of life pre-operatively (mean ± standard deviation: 0.20 ± 0.18) to moderately high quality of life (mean ± standard deviation: 0.71 ± 0.21) reflecting a large improvement in ability to achieve each goal. Although achievement improved, for each goal, the patient estimates of the extent to which the knee arthroplasty had contributed to achieving the goal was lower than their initial expectation provided pre-operatively (mean difference range: 0.6 to 1.9 on an 11-point scale).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing TKA have high expectations that their surgery will address their primary goals. Despite surgery largely achieving these goals (improved pain and function), the extent to which the goals were achieved was lower than patients had expected pre-operatively.

A multicenter randomized trial to compare automatic versus as-needed follow-up for children hospitalized with common infections: The FAAN-C trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Physicians commonly recommend automatic primary care follow-up visits to children being discharged from the hospital. While automatic follow-up provides an opportunity to address postdischarge needs, the alternative is as-needed follow-up. With this strategy, families monitor their child's symptoms and decide if they need a follow-up visit in the days after discharge. In addition to being family centered, as-needed follow-up has the potential to reduce time and financial burdens on both families and the healthcare system. As-needed follow-up has been shown to be safe and effective for children hospitalized with bronchiolitis, but the extent to which hospitalized children with other common conditions might benefit from as-needed follow-up is unclear.

METHODS

The Follow-up Automatically versus As-Needed Comparison (FAAN-C, or "fancy") trial is a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Children who are hospitalized for pneumonia, urinary tract infection, skin and soft tissue infection, or acute gastroenteritis are eligible to participate. Participants are randomized to an as-needed versus automatic posthospitalization follow-up recommendation. The sample size estimate is 2674 participants and the primary outcome is all-cause hospital readmission within 14 days of discharge. Secondary outcomes are medical interventions and child health-related quality of life. Analyses will be conducted in an intention-to-treat manner, testing noninferiority of as-needed follow-up compared with automatic follow-up.

DISCUSSION

FAAN-C will elucidate the relative benefits of an as-needed versus automatic follow-up recommendation, informing one of the most common decisions faced by families of hospitalized children and their medical providers. Findings from FAAN-C will also have implications for national quality metrics and guidelines.

Removing the physician from the equation: Patient-controlled, home-based therapeutic drug self-monitoring of tacrolimus

The dosing of tacrolimus, which forms the backbone of immunosuppressive therapy after kidney transplantation, is complex. This is due to its variable pharmacokinetics (both between and within individual patients), narrow therapeutic index, and the severe consequences of over- and underexposure, which may cause toxicity and rejection, respectively. Tacrolimus is, therefore, routinely dosed by means of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). TDM is performed for as long as the transplant functions and frequent and often lifelong sampling is therefore the rule. This puts a significant burden on patients and transplant professionals and is associated with high healthcare-associated costs. Furthermore, by its very nature, TDM is reactive and has no predictive power. Finally, the current practice of TDM does not foresee in an active role for patients themselves. Rather, the physician or pharmacist prescribes the next tacrolimus dose after obtaining the concentration measurement test results. In this article, we propose a strategy of patient-controlled, home-based, self-TDM of the immunosuppressant tacrolimus after transplantation. We argue that with the combined use of population tacrolimus pharmacokinetic models, home-based sampling by means of dried blood spotting and implementation of telemedicine, this may become a feasible approach in the near future.

Limited Evidence of Shared Decision Making for Prostate Cancer Screening in Audio-Recorded Primary Care Visits Among Black Men and their Healthcare Providers

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based prostate cancer screening is a preference-sensitive decision for which experts recommend a shared decision making (SDM) approach. This study aimed to examine PSA screening SDM in primary care. Methods included qualitative analysis of audio-recorded patient-provider interactions supplemented by quantitative description. Participants included 5 clinic providers and 13 patients who were: (1) 40-69 years old, (2) Black, (3) male, and (4) attending clinic for routine primary care. Main measures were SDM element themes and "observing patient involvement in decision making" (OPTION) scoring. Some discussions addressed advantages, disadvantages, and/or scientific uncertainty of screening, however, few patients received all SDM elements. Nearly all providers recommended screening, however, only 3 patients were directly asked about screening preferences. Few patients were asked about prostate cancer knowledge (2), urological symptoms (3), or family history (6). Most providers discussed disadvantages (80%) and advantages (80%) of PSA screening. Average OPTION score was 25/100 (range 0-67) per provider. Our study found limited SDM during PSA screening consultations. The counseling that did take place utilized components of SDM but inconsistently and incompletely. We must improve SDM for PSA screening for diverse patient populations to promote health equity. This study highlights the need to improve SDM for PSA screening.

Communicating cardiovascular risk: Systematic review of qualitative evidence

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular risk prediction models are widely used to help individuals understand risk and make decisions.

METHODS

Systematic review of qualitative evidence. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL. We included English-language qualitative studies on the communication of cardiovascular risk. We assessed study quality using Hawker et al.'s tool and synthesised data thematically.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies were included. Many patients think that risk scores are of limited practical value. Other sources of information feed into informal estimates of risk, which may lead patients to reject the results of clinical risk assessment when the two conflict. Clinicians identify a number of barriers to risk communication, including patients' limited understanding of risk and excessive anxiety. They use a range of strategies for adapting risk communication. Both clinicians and individuals express specific preferences for risk communication formats.

DISCUSSION

Ways of communicating risk that provide some comparison or reference point seem more promising. The broader context of communication around risk may be more important than the risk scoring instrument. Risk communication interventions, in practice, may be more about appeals to emotion than a rationalistic model of decision-making.

Exploring shared decision-making needs in lung cancer screening among high-risk groups and health care providers in China: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The intricate balance between the advantages and risks of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) impedes the utilization of lung cancer screening (LCS). Guiding shared decision-making (SDM) for well-informed choices regarding LCS is pivotal. There has been a notable increase in research related to SDM. However, these studies possess limitations. For example, they may ignore the identification of decision support and needs from the perspective of health care providers and high-risk groups. Additionally, these studies have not adequately addressed the complete SDM process, including pre-decisional needs, the decision-making process, and post-decision experiences. Furthermore, the East-West divide of SDM has been largely ignored. This study aimed to explore the decisional needs and support for shared decision-making for LCS among health care providers and high-risk groups in China.

METHODS

Informed by the Ottawa Decision-Support Framework, we conducted qualitative, face-to-face in-depth interviews to explore shared decision-making among 30 lung cancer high-risk individuals and 9 health care providers. Content analysis was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 4 decisional needs that impair shared decision-making: (1) LCS knowledge deficit; (2) inadequate supportive resources; (3) shared decision-making conceptual bias; and (4) delicate doctor-patient bonds. We identified 3 decision supports: (1) providing information throughout the LCS process; (2) providing shared decision-making decision coaching; and (3) providing decision tools.

CONCLUSIONS

This study offers valuable insights into the decisional needs and support required to undergo LCS among high-risk individuals and perspectives from health care providers. Future studies should aim to design interventions that enhance the quality of shared decision-making by offering LCS information, decision tools for LCS, and decision coaching for shared decision-making (e.g., through community nurses). Simultaneously, it is crucial to assess individuals' needs for effective deliberation to prevent conflicts and regrets after arriving at a decision.

Patient-Centered Adult Cardiovascular Care: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Patient-centered care is gaining widespread acceptance by the medical and lay communities and is increasingly recognized as a goal of high-quality health care delivery. Patient-centered care is based on ethical principles and aims at establishing a partnership between the health care team and patient, family member, or both in the care planning and decision-making process. Patient-centered care involves providing respectful care by tailoring management decisions to patients' beliefs, preferences, and values. A collaborative care approach can enhance patient engagement, foster shared decision-making that aligns with patient values and goals, promote more personalized and effective cardiovascular care, and potentially improve patient outcomes. The objective of this scientific statement is to inform health care professionals and stakeholders about the role and impact of patient-centered care in adult cardiovascular medicine. This scientific statement describes the background and rationale for patient-centered care in cardiovascular medicine, provides insight into patient-oriented medication management and patient-reported outcome measures, highlights opportunities and strategies to overcome challenges in patient-centered care, and outlines knowledge gaps and future directions.

Shared decision-making for supporting women's decisions about breast cancer screening

BACKGROUND

In breast cancer screening programmes, women may have discussions with a healthcare provider to help them decide whether or not they wish to join the breast cancer screening programme. This process is called shared decision-making (SDM) and involves discussions and decisions based on the evidence and the person's values and preferences. SDM is becoming a recommended approach in clinical guidelines, extending beyond decision aids. However, the overall effect of SDM in women deciding to participate in breast cancer screening remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of SDM on women's satisfaction, confidence, and knowledge when deciding whether to participate in breast cancer screening.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 8 August 2023. We also screened abstracts from two relevant conferences from 2020 to 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs assessing interventions targeting various components of SDM. The focus was on supporting women aged 40 to 75 at average or above-average risk of breast cancer in their decision to participate in breast cancer screening.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and conducted data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence. Review outcomes included satisfaction with the decision-making process, confidence in the decision made, knowledge of all options, adherence to the chosen option, women's involvement in SDM, woman-clinician communication, and mental health.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 19 studies with 64,215 randomised women, mostly with an average to moderate risk of breast cancer. Two studies covered all aspects of SDM; six examined shortened forms of SDM involving communication on risks and personal values; and 11 focused on enhanced communication of risk without other SDM aspects. SDM involving all components compared to control The two eligible studies did not assess satisfaction with the SDM process or confidence in the decision. Based on a single study, SDM showed uncertain effects on participant knowledge regarding the age to start screening (risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 2.28; 133 women; very low certainty evidence) and frequency of testing (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.04; 133 women; very low certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured. Abbreviated forms of SDM with clarification of values and preferences compared to control Of the six included studies, none evaluated satisfaction with the SDM process. These interventions may reduce conflict in the decision made, based on two measures, Decisional Conflict Scale scores (mean difference (MD) -1.60, 95% CI -4.21 to 0.87; conflict scale from 0 to 100; 4 studies; 1714 women; very low certainty evidence) and the proportion of women with residual conflict compared to control at one to three months' follow-up (rate of women with a conflicted decision, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.99; 1 study; 1001 women, very low certainty evidence). Knowledge of all options was assessed through knowledge scores and informed choice. The effect of SDM may enhance knowledge (MDs ranged from 0.47 to 1.44 higher scores on a scale from 0 to 10; 5 studies; 2114 women; low certainty evidence) and may lead to higher rates of informed choice (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.63; 4 studies; 2449 women; low certainty evidence) compared to control at one to three months' follow-up. These interventions may result in little to no difference in anxiety (MD 0.54, 95% -0.96 to 2.14; scale from 20 to 80; 2 studies; 749 women; low certainty evidence) and the number of women with worries about cancer compared to control at four to six weeks' follow-up (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.06; 1 study, 639 women; low certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured. Enhanced communication about risks without other SDM aspects compared to control Of 11 studies, three did not report relevant outcomes for this review, and none assessed satisfaction with the SDM process. Confidence in the decision made was measured by decisional conflict and anticipated regret of participating in screening or not. These interventions, without addressing values and preferences, may result in lower confidence in the decision compared to regular communication strategies at two weeks' follow-up (MD 2.89, 95% CI -2.35 to 8.14; Decisional Conflict Scale from 0 to 100; 2 studies; 1191 women; low certainty evidence). They may result in higher anticipated regret if participating in screening (MD 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.41) and lower anticipated regret if not participating in screening (MD -0.28, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.14). These interventions increase knowledge (MD 1.14, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.62; scale from 0 to 10; 4 studies; 2510 women; high certainty evidence), while it is unclear if there is a higher rate of informed choice compared to regular communication strategies at two to four weeks' follow-up (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.92; 2 studies; 1805 women; low certainty evidence). These interventions result in little to no difference in anxiety (MD 0.33, 95% CI -1.55 to 0.99; scale from 20 to 80) and depression (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.45; scale from 0 to 21; 2 studies; 1193 women; high certainty evidence) and lower cancer worry compared to control (MD -0.17, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.08; scale from 1 to 4; 1 study; 838 women; high certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Studies using abbreviated forms of SDM and other forms of enhanced communications indicated improvements in knowledge and reduced decisional conflict. However, uncertainty remains about the effect of SDM on supporting women's decisions. Most studies did not evaluate outcomes considered important for this review topic, and those that did measured different concepts. High-quality randomised trials are needed to evaluate SDM in diverse cultural settings with a focus on outcomes such as women's satisfaction with choices aligned to their values.

Implementing a shared decision-making intervention to support treatment decisions for patients following an anterior cruciate ligament rupture - a protocol for the POP-ACLR feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Treatment for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture may follow a surgical or nonsurgical pathway. At present, there is uncertainty around treatment choice. Two shared decision-making tools have been codesigned to support patients to make a decision about treatment following an ACL rupture. The shared decision-making tools include a patient information leaflet and an option grid. We report the protocol for a mixed-methods feasibility study, with nested qualitative interviews, to understand feasibility, acceptability, indicators of effectiveness and implementation factors of these shared decision-making tools (combined to form one shared decision-making intervention).

METHODS

A single-centre non-randomised feasibility study will be conducted with 20 patients. Patients diagnosed with an ACL rupture following magnetic resonance imaging will be identified from an orthopaedic clinic. The shared decision-making intervention will be delivered during a clinical consultation with a physiotherapist. The primary feasibility outcomes include the following: recruitment rate, fidelity, acceptability and follow-up questionnaire completion. The secondary outcome is the satisfaction with decision scale. The nested qualitative interview will explore experience of using the shared decision-making intervention to understand acceptability, implementation factors and areas for further refinement.

DISCUSSION

This study will determine the feasibility of using a newly developed shared decision-making intervention designed to support patients to make a decision about treatment of their ACL rupture. The acceptability and indicators of effectiveness will also be explored. In the long term, the shared decision-making intervention may improve service and patient outcomes and ensure cost-effectiveness for the NHS; ensuring those most likely to benefit from surgical treatment proceed along this pathway.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Pending registration on ISRCTN.

Associations between knowledge of health issues and health care satisfaction and propensity to complain: a cross-sectional survey of adult men in Denmark

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to investigate associations between knowledge of health issues and healthcare satisfaction and propensity to complain including the association between knowledge and greater patient involvement.

DESIGN

The present study is a secondary analysis of a larger cross-sectional case vignette survey.

SETTING

Survey conducted in adult Danish men.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants included 6755 men aged 45-70 years.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants responded to a survey with scenarios illustrating prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and different information provision.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Using Likert scales (scored 1-5), participants rated their satisfaction with the care described and their inclination to complain and responded to a short quiz (scored 0-3) assessing their knowledge about the PSA test.

RESULTS

Satisfaction with healthcare increased with better quiz performance (Likert difference 0.13 (95% CI .07 to 0.20), p <0.001, totally correct vs totally incorrect responders) and correspondingly, the desire to complain significantly decreased (Likert difference -0.34 (95% CI 0.40 to -0.27), p <0.001). Respondents with higher education performed better (mean quiz score difference 0.59 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.67), p <0.001, most educated vs least educated). Responders who received information about the PSA test generally performed better (quiz score difference 0.41 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.47), p<0.001, neutral vs no information). Overestimation of PSA merits was more common than underestimation (7.9% vs 3.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Mens' knowledge of the benefits of screening varies with education, predicts satisfaction with care and the desire to complain, and may be improved through greater involvement in decision-making.

Severe Fetal CAKUT (Congenital Anomalies of the Kidneys and Urinary Tract), Prenatal Consultations, and Initiation of Neonatal Dialysis

INTRODUCTION

 Pediatric nephrology prenatal consultations for congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract (CAKUT) and criteria for kidney replacement therapy initiation in neonatal end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) are not well described. We evaluated pediatric nephrology approaches to prenatal CAKUT counseling and neonatal dialysis initiation.

METHODS

 A 35-question Qualtrics survey was distributed via the North American Pediatric Renal Trials and Collaborative Studies email list between January and March 2021. Thirty-nine pediatric nephrology centers completed the survey.

RESULTS

 All but one responding center (n = 38) provide prenatal CAKUT consultations and neonatal dialysis, with wide variability in reported multispecialty involvement. Nearly half (47%) of centers utilize written/unwritten criteria for offering neonatal dialysis. The most common contraindications to neonatal dialysis were parental refusal (61%), contraindication to access placement by surgeons (55%), and birth weight (BW) contraindication (55%, with < 1,500 g being the most common BW contraindication). Overall, 79% of centers reported caring for < 5 neonates with ESKD in the past year, 61% use hemodialysis therapies prior to peritoneal dialysis in neonates requiring dialysis, and 100% transition to peritoneal dialysis by hospital discharge.

CONCLUSION

 Many pediatric nephrology programs provide prenatal CAKUT consultations and neonatal dialysis, but with variability in practice approach. Further multicenter research regarding prenatal consultations and neonatal dialysis outcomes is necessary to further improve care delivery to this population.

Better Conversations for Better Informed Consent: Talking with Surgical Patients

For more than sixty years, surgeons have used bioethical strategies to promote patient self-determination, many of these now collectively described as "informed consent." Yet the core framework-understanding, risks, benefits, and alternatives-fails to support patients in deliberation about treatment. We find that surgeons translate this framework into an overly complicated technical explanation of disease and treatment and an overly simplified narrative that surgery will "fix" the problem. They omit critical information about the goals and downsides of surgery and present untenable options as a matter of patient choice. We propose a novel framework called "better conversations." Herein, surgeons provide context about clinical norms, establish the goals of surgery, and comprehensively delineate the downsides of surgery to generate a deliberative space for patients to consider whether surgery is right for them. This paradigm shift meets the standards for informed consent, supports deliberation, and allows patients to anticipate and prepare for the experience of treatment.

Primary care patient interests in joining a planned multi-cancer early detection clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Clinical trials are being conducted and are being planned to assess the safety and efficacy of multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests for use in cancer screening. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of primary care patient outreach in recruiting participants to a planned MCED clinical trial, assess patient interest in trial participation, and measure decisional conflict related to participation.

METHODS

The research team used the electronic medical record of a large, urban health care system to identify primary care patients 50-80 years of age who were potentially eligible for a planned MCED trial. We mailed information about the planned MCED trial to identified patients and then contacted the patients by telephone to obtain consent and administer a baseline survey. Subsequently, we contacted consented patients to complete an interview to review the mailed information and elicit perceptions about trial participation. Finally, a research coordinator administered an endpoint telephone survey to assess patient interest in and decisional conflict related to joining the trial.

RESULTS

We randomly identified 1000 eligible patients and were able to make contact with 690 (69%) by telephone. Of the patients contacted, 217 (31%) completed the decision counseling session and 219 (32%) completed the endpoint survey. Among endpoint survey respondents, 177 (81%) expressed interest in joining the MCED trial and 162 (74%) reported low decisional conflict.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients were contacted and about a quarter of those contacted expressed interest in and low decisional conflict about joining the planned MCED trial. Research is needed to determine how to optimize patient outreach and engage patients in shared decision-making about MCED trial participation.

Prostate Cancer Foundation Screening Guidelines for Black Men in the United States

BACKGROUND

In the United States, Black men are at highest risk for being diagnosed with and dying from prostate cancer. Given this disparity, we examined relevant data to establish clinical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening guidelines for Black men in the United States.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search identified 1848 unique publications for screening. Of those screened, 287 studies were selected for full-text review, and 264 were considered relevant and form the basis for these guidelines. The numbers were reported according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials provided Level 1 evidence that regular PSA screening of men 50 to 74 years of age of average risk reduced metastasis and prostate cancer death at 16 to 22 years of follow-up. The best available evidence specifically for Black men comes from observational and modeling studies that consider age to obtain a baseline PSA, frequency of testing, and age when screening should end. Cohort studies suggest that discussions about baseline PSA testing between Black men and their clinicians should begin in the early 40s, and data from modeling studies indicate prostate cancer develops 3 to 9 years earlier in Black men compared with non-Black men. Lowering the age for baseline PSA testing to 40 to 45 years of age from 50 to 55 years of age, followed by regular screening until 70 years of age (informed by PSA values and health factors), could reduce prostate cancer mortality in Black men (approximately 30% relative risk reduction) without substantially increasing overdiagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines recommend that Black men should obtain information about PSA screening for prostate cancer. Among Black men who elect screening, baseline PSA testing should occur between ages 40 and 45. Depending on PSA value and health status, annual screening should be strongly considered. (Supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation.).

Effectiveness of interventions to enhance shared decision-making in wound care: A systematic review

AIMS

To explore the effectiveness of interventions to enhance patient participation in shared decision-making in wound care and tissue viability.

BACKGROUND

Caring for people living with a wound is complex due to interaction between wound healing, symptoms, psychological wellbeing and treatment effectiveness. To respond to this complexity, there has been recent emphasis on the importance of delivering patient centred wound care and shared decision-making to personalise health care. However, little is known about the effectiveness of existing interventions to support shared decision-making in wound care.

DESIGN

Systematic review of interventional studies to enhance shared decision-making in wound care or tissue viability. This was reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines 2020.

METHODS

Interventional primary research studies published in English up to January 2023 were included. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were undertaken independently by two authors.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails (trials database), CINAHL, British Nursing Index (BNI), WorldCat (thesis database), Scopus and registries of ongoing studies (ISRCTN registry and clinicaltrials.gov).

RESULTS

1063 abstracts were screened, and eight full-text studies included. Findings indicate, interventions to support shared decision-making are positively received. Goal or need setting components may assist knowledge transfer between patient and clinician, and could lower short term decisional conflict. However, generally findings within this study had very low certainty due to the inconsistencies in outcomes reported, and the variation and complexity of single and multiple interventions used.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research on shared decision-making interventions in wound care should include the involvement of stakeholders and programme theory to underpin the interventions developed to consider the complexity of interventions.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE

Patients setting out their needs or goals and exploring patient questions are important and should be considered in clinical care.

REGISTRATION

The review protocol was prospectively registered (PROSPERO database: CRD42023389820).

NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Not applicable as this is a systematic review.

Maternity healthcare professionals' experiences of supporting women in decision-making for labour and birth: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

To explore and characterise maternity healthcare professionals' (MHCPs) experience and practice of shared decision-making (SDM), to inform policy, research and practice development.

DESIGN

Qualitative focus group study.

SETTING

Large Maternity Unit in the Southwest of England.

PARTICIPANTS

MHCPs who give information relating to clinical procedures and pregnancy care relating to labour and birth and are directly involved in decision-making conversations were purposively sampled to ensure representation across MHCP groups.

DATA COLLECTION

A semistructured topic guide was used.

DATA ANALYSIS

Reflexive thematic analysis was undertaken.

RESULTS

Seven focus groups were conducted, comprising a total of 24 participants (3-5 per group). Two themes were developed: contextualising decision-making and controversies in current decision-making. Contextual factors that influenced decision-making practices included lack of time and challenges faced in intrapartum care. MHCPs reported variation in how they approach decision-making conversations and asked for more training on how to consistently achieve SDM. There were communication challenges with women who did not speak English. Three controversies were explored: the role of prior clinical experience, the validity of informed consent when women were in pain and during life-threatening emergencies and instances where women declined medical advice.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that MHCPs are committed to SDM but need better support to deliver it. Structured processes including Core Information Sets, communication skills training and decision support aids may help to consistently deliver SDM in maternity care.

Prevalence and determinants of shared decision-making for PSA testing in the United States

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing but appears underutilized. This population-based study assessed the prevalence and determinants of SDM for PSA testing among US men.

METHODS

We assessed PSA testing rates and SDM engagement in men aged 40 and older without prostate cancer history using the 2019 National Health Interview Survey. SDM was defined as discussing the advantages and disadvantages of PSA testing with a physician. We used multivariable logistic regression with machine learning to identify factors associated with lack of SDM.

RESULTS

Among 9723 eligible participants (mean age 58 years), lifetime PSA testing prevalence was 45.9% and the 1-year testing incidence was 29.1%. Only 24.1% reported engaging in SDM with a physician, while 62.9% never discussed PSA testing. Younger age and lower education levels were the primary determinants of decreased SDM engagement. Men with less education engaged in SDM less than half as often as those with higher education levels across all age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Societal guidelines recommend SDM for PSA testing. However, most men, regardless of age, have never engaged in SDM conversations with a healthcare provider about PSA testing, especially those with less education. More efforts are needed to improve patient-provider conversations about the potential benefits and harms of PSA testing.

Language in Bioethics: Beyond the Representational View

Though assumptions about language underlie all bioethical work, the field has rarely partaken of theories of language. This article encourages a more linguistically engaged bioethics. We describe the tacit conception of language that is frequently upheld in bioethics-what we call the representational view, which sees language essentially as a means of description. We examine how this view has routed the field's theories and interventions down certain paths. We present an alternative model of language-the pragmatic view-and explore how it expands and clarifies traditional bioethical concerns. To lend concreteness, we apply the pragmatic view to a pervasive concept in bioethics and adjacent fields: decision making. We suggest that problems of the decision-making approach to bioethical issues are grounded in adherence to the representational view. Drawing on empirical work in surgery and critical care, we show how the pragmatic view productively reframes bioethical questions about how medical treatments are pursued.

Empowering patients in primary care: a qualitative exploration of the usability and utility of an online diabetes self-management tool

BACKGROUND

Despite the potential advantages of Internet-based diabetes self-management education, its adoption was not widespread among Singapore's public primary care clinics (polyclinics). An interactive online tool was thus developed to help educate patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and was now ready for user testing before implementation.

AIM

To explore the perceived utility and usability of the educational tool in patients with suboptimally-controlled T2DM in a Singapore primary care setting.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were used to gather qualitative data from multi-ethnic Asian adults who had suboptimally-controlled T2DM. A total of 17 IDIs were conducted between April 2022 to March 2023, audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to identify emergent themes via thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Regarding utility, users found the educational tool useful because it provided them with information that was comprehensive, accessible, reliable, and manageable. Regarding usability, the majority of users reported that the educational tool was easy to use, and suggested ways to improve navigational cues, visual clarity, readability and user engagement.

CONCLUSION

Participants generally found the educational tool useful and easy to use. A revised educational tool will be developed based on their feedback and implemented in clinical practice.

Improving medication prescribing-related outcomes for vulnerable elderly in transitions on high-risk medications (IMPROVE-IT HRM): a pilot randomized trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Seniors with recurrent hospitalizations who are taking multiple medications including high-risk medications are at particular risk for serious adverse medication events. We will assess whether an expert Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology (CPT) medication management intervention during hospitalization with follow-up post-discharge and communication with circle of care is feasible and can decrease drug therapy problems amongst this group.

METHODS

The design is a pragmatic pilot randomized trial with 1:1 patient-level concealed randomization with blinded outcome assessment and data analysis. Participants will be adults 65 years and older admitted to internal medicine services for more than 2 days, who have had at least one other hospitalization in the prior year, taking five or more chronic medications including at least one high-risk medication. The CPT intervention identifies medication targets; completes consult, including priorities for improving prescribing negotiated with the patient; starts the care plan; ensures a detailed discharge medication reconciliation and circle-of-care communication; and sees the patient at least twice after hospital discharge via virtual visits to consolidate the care plan in the community. Control group receives usual care. Primary outcomes are feasibility - recruitment, retention, costs, and clinical - number of drug therapy problems improved, with secondary outcomes examining coordination of transitions in care, quality of life, and healthcare utilization and costs. Follow-up is to 3-month posthospital discharge.

DISCUSSION

If results support feasibility of ramp-up and promising clinical outcomes, a follow-up definitive trial will be organized using a developing national platform and medication appropriateness network. Since the intervention allows a very scarce medical specialty expertise to be offered via virtual care, there is potential to improve the safety, outcomes, and cost of care widely.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04077281.

Low-value chronic prescription of acid reducing medication among Dutch general practitioners: impact of a patient education intervention

BACKGROUND

Dyspepsia is a commonly encountered clinical condition in Dutch general practice, which is often treated through the prescription of acid-reducing medication (ARM). However, recent studies indicate that the majority of chronic ARM users lack an indication for their use and that their long-term use is associated with adverse outcomes. We developed a patient-focussed educational intervention aiming to reduce low-value (chronic) use of ARM.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled study, and evaluated its effect on the low-value chronic prescription of ARM using data from a subset (n = 26) of practices from the Nivel Primary Care Database. The intervention involved distributing an educational waiting room posters and flyers informing both patients and general practitioners (GPs) regarding the appropriate indications for prescription of an ARM for dyspepsia, which also referred to an online decision aid. The interventions' effect was evaluated through calculation of the odds ratio of a patient receiving a low-value chronic ARM prescription over the second half of 2021 and 2022 (i.e. pre-intervention vs. post-intervention).

RESULTS

In both the control and intervention groups, the proportion of patients receiving chronic low-value ARM prescriptions slightly increased. In the control group, it decreased from 50.3% in 2021 to 49.7% in 2022, and in the intervention group it increased from 51.3% in 2021 to 53.1% in 2022. Subsequent statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in low-value chronic prescriptions between the control and intervention groups (Odds ratio: 1.11 [0.84-1.47], p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our educational intervention did not result in a change in the low-value chronic prescription of ARM; approximately half of the patients of the intervention and control still received low-value chronic ARM prescriptions. The absence of effect might be explained by selection bias of participating practices, awareness on the topic of chronic AMR prescriptions and the relative low proportion of low-value chronic ARM prescribing in the intervention as well as the control group compared to an assessment conducted two years prior.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

10/31/2023 NCT06108817.

Aids to improve understanding of statistical risk in patients consenting for surgery and interventional procedures: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Informed consent is an essential process in clinical decision-making, through which healthcare providers educate patients about benefits, risks, and alternatives of a procedure. Statistical risk information is difficult to communicate and the effectiveness of aids aimed at supporting this type of communication is uncertain. This systematic review aims to study the impact of risk communication adjuncts on patients' understanding of statistical risk in surgery and interventional procedures.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed across Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science until July 2021 with a repeated search in September 2022. RCTs and observational studies examining risk communication tools (e.g., information leaflets and audio-video) in adult (age >16) patients undergoing a surgical or interventional procedure were included. Primary outcomes included the objective assessment of statistical risk recall. Secondary outcomes included patient attitudes with respect to statistical information. Due to the study heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 4348 articles were identified, and following abstract and full-text screening 14 articles, including 9 RCTs, were included. The total number of adult patients was 1513. The most common risk communication tool used was written information (n = 7). Most RCTs (7/9, 77.8%) showed statistically significant improvements in patient understanding of statistical risk in the intervention group. Quality assessment found some concerns with all RCTs.

CONCLUSION

Risk communication tools appear to improve recall of statistical risk. Additional prospective trials comparing various aids simultaneously are warranted to determine the most effective method of improving understanding.

Decision aids for cancer survivors' engagement with survivorship care services after primary treatment: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To elucidate existing decision aids (DAs) in supporting cancer survivors' decisions to engage in cancer survivorship care services after primary treatment. Secondary objectives are to assess the DA acceptability, impact of DAs, and implementation barriers.

METHODS

Databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL) were searched to collect publications from inception through September 2021. Studies describing the development or evaluation of DAs used for survivorship care services after primary cancer treatment were included. Article selection and critical appraisal were conducted independently by two authors.

RESULTS

We included 16 studies that described 13 DAs and addressed multiple survivorship care domains: prevention of recurrence/new cancers in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors and breast cancer gene mutation carriers, family building options, health insurance plans, health promotion (substance use behavior, cardiovascular disease risk reduction), advanced care planning, and post-treatment follow-up intensity. The electronic format was used to design most DAs for self-administration. The content presentation covered decisional context, options, and value clarification exercises. DAs were acceptable and associated with higher knowledge but presented inconclusive decisional outcomes. Implementation barriers included lack of design features for connectivity to care, low self-efficacy, and low perceived DA usefulness among healthcare professionals. Other survivor characteristics included age, literacy, preferred timing, and setting.

CONCLUSIONS

A diverse range of DAs exists in survivorship care services engagement with favorable knowledge outcomes. Future work should clarify the impact of DAs on decisional outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

DA characterization and suggestions for prospective developers could enhance support for cancer survivors encountering complex decisions throughout the survivorship continuum.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of preoperative predictors for early mortality following hip fracture surgery

Hip fractures are a global health problem with a high postoperative mortality rate. Preoperative predictors for early mortality could be used to optimise and personalise healthcare strategies. This study aimed to identify predictors for early mortality following hip fracture surgery. Cohort studies examining independent preoperative predictors for mortality following hip fracture surgery were identified through a systematic search on Scopus and PubMed. Predictors for 30-day mortality were the primary outcome, and predictors for mortality within 1 year were secondary outcomes. Primary outcomes were analysed with random-effects meta-analyses. Confidence in the cumulative evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria. Secondary outcomes were synthesised narratively. Thirty-three cohort studies involving 462,699 patients were meta-analysed. Five high-quality evidence predictors for 30-day mortality were identified: age per year (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.04-1.07), ASA score ≥ 3 (OR: 2.69, 95% CI: 2.12-3.42), male gender (OR: 2.00, 95% CI: 1.85-2.18), institutional residence (OR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.31-2.49), and metastatic cancer (OR: 2.83, 95% CI: 2.58-3.10). Additionally, six moderate-quality evidence predictors were identified: chronic renal failure, dementia, diabetes, low haemoglobin, heart failures, and a history of any malignancy. Weak evidence was found for non-metastatic cancer. This review found relevant preoperative predictors which could be used to identify patients who are at high risk of 30-day mortality following hip fracture surgery. For some predictors, the prognostic value could be increased by further subcategorising the conditions by severity.

Aide à la décision pour le dépistage du cancer du sein: Étude de cas pré-test/post-test

Les lignes directrices canadiennes recommandent la prise de décision partagée aux femmes de moins de 50 ans qui envisagent de passer des examens de dépistage du cancer du sein. Les infirmières peuvent les épauler dans le processus de décision. La présente étude de cas, menée selon une approche pré-test/post-test auprès d’une seule participante, a mesuré le changement survenu dans le conflit décisionnel vécu par une femme de moins de 50 ans ayant reçu du soutien à la décision pour choisir de subir ou non une mammographie de dépistage. Avant l’étude, cette femme, âgée de 44 ans, présentait un risque de cancer du sein dans la moyenne et vivait un conflit décisionnel. Elle a obtenu un score de 1 sur 4 au test SURE, indiquant qu’elle n’était pas bien informée, que ses valeurs n’étaient pas clairement définies et qu’elle ne se sentait pas bien soutenue. Après avoir reçu le soutien d’une infirmière formée pour l’aider à choisir de procéder ou non à une mammographie de dépistage du cancer du sein, elle a obtenu un score de 4 au test SURE, un signe d’absence de conflit décisionnel. La participante a gagné la confiance nécessaire pour prendre une décision éclairée qui respecte ses valeurs, le soutien à la décision lui ayant permis d’améliorer ses connaissances et d’apaiser son conflit décisionnel.

Healthcare Professionals' Perceptions about the Implementation of Shared Decision-Making in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study from a Virtual Community of Practice

Background

The incorporation of shared decision making (SDM) is a central part of empowerment processes, as it facilitates greater activation on the part of patients, increasing the likelihood of them gaining control over their healthcare and developing skills to solve their health problems. Despite these benefits, there are still difficulties in the implementation of SDM among healthcare professionals due to internal and external factors related to the context and health systems.

Aim

To explore primary care professionals (PCPs)' perceptions of the SDM model, based on their preconceptions and experience in clinical practice.

Methods

A framework analysis was conducted on qualitative data derived from a virtual community practice forum, within a cluster-randomized clinical trial developed in the e-MPODERA project.

Results

The most important points in the opinions of the PCPs were: exploring the patients' values, preferences and expectations, providing them with and checking their understanding of up-to-date and evidence-based health information. The analysis revealed three themes: determinants of the implementation process of SDM, lack of consistency and dilemmas and benefits of PCP active listening, motivation and positive expectations of SDM.

Discussion

In our initial analysis, we examined the connections between the categories of the TDC model and its application in the primary care context. The categories related to the model reflect the theoretical understanding of professionals, while those related to perceptions of its application and use show certain discrepancies. These discrepancies could indicate a lack of understanding of the model and its real-world implications or insufficient commitment on the part of professionals or the organization to ensure its effective implementation.

Conclusions

Specific targeted training that addresses knowledge, attitudes and practice may resolve the aforementioned findings.

Measure of Caregiver Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Knowledge Is Responsive to Decision Aid on Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

OBJECTIVE

Adapt and test a measure of knowledge for caregivers of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and evaluate the impact of the information component of a decision aid (DA) on participant knowledge.

METHODS

A set of seven knowledge items were created based on prior knowledge measures and clinical guidelines. As part of a larger cross-sectional survey study of caregivers of children diagnosed with ADHD, caregivers were randomized to one of two arms: 1) a DA arm, where participants reviewed the information component of the Cincinnati Children's Hospital's DA, and 2) a control arm, where participants were not shown a DA. All participants completed the seven knowledge items. Knowledge items were assessed for difficulty, quality of distractors, acceptability, and redundancy. Total knowledge scores (0-100) for the DA and control arm were compared.

RESULTS

Caregivers were assigned to the DA arm (n = 243) or the control arm (n = 260). All 7 knowledge items were retained as no items were too difficult or too easy, all response options were used, there were little missing data, and no items were redundant. The overall knowledge score was normally distributed, and almost covered the full range of scores (5-100). Those who received the DA component had higher knowledge scores (M=68, SD=23) than those who did not receive the DA component (M=60, SD=19, P < .01, d=0.4).

CONCLUSIONS

The Caregiver ADHD Knowledge (CAKe) measure was acceptable and demonstrated construct validity as those who were assigned to review the DA component demonstrated greater knowledge than those who were not assigned to review the DA component.

Qualitative Analysis of Patient Decisional Needs for Medications to Treat Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

The development of tools to support shared decision-making should be informed by patients' decisional needs and treatment preferences, which are largely unknown for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) pharmacotherapy decisions. We aimed to identify patients' decisional needs when considering HFrEF medication options.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. We recruited patients with HFrEF from 2 Canadian ambulatory HF clinics and clinicians from Canadian HF guideline panels, HF clinics, and Canadian HF Society membership. We identified themes through inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants included 15 patients and 12 clinicians. Six themes and associated subthemes emerged related to HFrEF pharmacotherapy decision-making: (1) patient decisional needs included lack of awareness of a choice or options, difficult decision timing and stage, information overload, and inadequate motivation, support and resources; (2) patients' decisional conflict varied substantially, driven by unclear trade-offs; (3) treatment attribute preferences-patients focused on both benefits and downsides of treatment, whereas clinicians centered discussion on benefits; (4) quality of life-patients' definition of quality of life depended on pre-HF activity, though most patients demonstrated adaptability in adjusting their daily activities to manage HF; (5) shared decision-making process-clinicians' described a process more akin to informed consent; (6) decision support-multimedia decision aids, virtual appointments, and primary-care comanagement emerged as potential enablers of shared decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HFrEF have several decisional needs, which are consistent with those that may respond to decision aids. These findings can inform the development of HFrEF pharmacotherapy decision aids to address these decisional needs and facilitate shared decision-making.

Decision support for breast cancer screening decisions: A single case pre-/post-test study

Canadian guidelines recommend shared decision making for women less than 50 years old who are considering breast cancer screening. Nurses can support women in making these decisions. This single case pre-/post-test study measured change in decisional conflict after decision support for a woman less than 50 years old considering whether or not to initiate mammography screening. At baseline, a 44-year-old female at average risk of breast cancer was experiencing decisional conflict. She scored 1 out of 4 on the SURE test indicating feeling uninformed, unclear values, and inadequate support. After receiving decision coaching with a breast cancer screening decision aid by a nurse trained in decision coaching, she scored 4 on the SURE test indicating no decisional conflict. She reached an informed decision consistent with her values about mammography screening. Providing decisional support improved her knowledge, reduced her decisional conflict, and enhanced her confidence in making an informed decision that was consistent with her values.

Use of Persuasive Language in Communication of Risk during Prostate Cancer Treatment Consultations

BACKGROUND

Physician treatment preference may influence how risks are communicated in prostate cancer consultations. We identified persuasive language used when describing cancer prognosis, life expectancy, and side effects in relation to a physician's recommendation for aggressive (surgery/radiation) or nonaggressive (active surveillance/watchful waiting) treatment.

METHODS

A qualitative analysis was performed on transcribed treatment consultations of 40 men with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer across 10 multidisciplinary providers. Quotes pertaining to cancer prognosis, life expectancy, and side effects were randomized. Coders predicted physician treatment recommendations from isolated blinded quotes. Testing characteristics of consensus predictions against the physician's treatment recommendation were reported. Coders then identified persuasive strategies favoring aggressive/nonaggressive treatment for each quote. Frequencies of persuasive strategies favoring aggressive/nonaggressive treatment were reported. Logistic regression quantified associations between persuasive strategies and physician treatment recommendations.

RESULTS

A total of 496 quotes about cancer prognosis (n = 127), life expectancy (n = 51), and side effects (n = 318) were identified. The accuracy of predicting treatment recommendation based on individual quotes containing persuasive language (n = 256/496, 52%) was 91%. When favoring aggressive treatment, persuasive language downplayed side effect risks and amplified cancer risk (recurrence, progression, or mortality). Significant predictors (P < 0.05) of aggressive treatment recommendation included favorable side effect interpretation, downplaying side effects, and long time horizon for cancer risk due to longevity. When favoring nonaggressive treatment, persuasive language amplified side effect risks and downplayed cancer risk. Significant predictors of nonaggressive treatment recommendation included unfavorable side effect interpretation, favorable interpretation of cancer risk, and short time horizon for cancer risk due to longevity.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians use persuasive language favoring their preferred treatment, regardless of whether their recommendation is appropriate.

IMPLICATIONS

Clinicians should quantify risk so patients can judge potential harm without solely relying on persuasive language.

HIGHLIGHTS

Physicians use persuasive language favoring their treatment recommendation when communicating risks of prostate cancer treatment, which may influence a patient's treatment choice.Coders predicted physician treatment recommendations based on isolated, randomized quotes about cancer prognosis, life expectancy, and side effects with 91% accuracy.Qualitative analysis revealed that when favoring nonaggressive treatment, physicians used persuasive language that amplified side effect risks and downplayed cancer risk. When favoring aggressive treatment, physicians did the opposite.Providers should be cognizant of using persuasive strategies and aim to provide quantified assessments of risk that are jointly interpreted with the patient so that patients can make evidence-based conclusions regarding risks without solely relying on persuasive language.

Spine surgeons facing second opinions: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The social and technological mutation of our contemporary period disrupts the traditional dyad that prevails in the relationship between physicians and patients.

PURPOSE

The solicitation of a second opinion by the patient may potentially alter this dyad and degrade the mutual trust between the stakeholders concerned. The doctor-patient relationship has often been studied from the patient's perspective, but data are scarce from the spine surgeon's point of view.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This qualitative study used the grounded theory approach, an inductive methodology emphasizing field data and rejecting predetermined assumptions.

PATIENT SAMPLE

We interviewed spine surgeons of different ages, experiences, and practice locations. We initially contacted 30 practitioners, but the final number (24 interviews; 11 orthopedists and 13 neurosurgeons) was determined by data saturation (the point at which no new topics appeared).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Themes and subthemes were analyzed using semistructured interviews until saturation was reached.

METHODS

Data were collected through individual interviews, independently analyzed thematically using specialized software, and triangulated by three researchers (an anthropologist, psychiatrist, and neurosurgeon).

RESULTS

Index surgeons were defined when their patients went for a second opinion and recourse surgeons were defined as surgeons who were asked for a second opinion. Data analysis identified five overarching themes based on recurring elements in the interviews: (1) analysis of the patient's motivations for seeking a second opinion; (2) impaired trust and disloyalty; (3) ego, authority, and surgeon image; (4) management of a consultation recourse (measurement and ethics); and (5) the second opinion as an avoidance strategy. Despite the inherent asymmetry in the doctor-patient relationship, surgeons and patients share two symmetrical continua according to their perspective (professional or consumerist), involving power and control on the one hand and loyalty and autonomy on the other. These shared elements can be found in index consultations (seeking high-level care/respecting trust/closing the loyalty gap/managing disengagement) and referral consultations (objective and independent advice/trusting of the index advice/avoiding negative and anxiety-provoking situations).

CONCLUSIONS

The second opinion often has a negative connotation with spine surgeons, who see it as a breach of loyalty and trust, without neglecting ego injury in their relationship with the patient. A paradigm shift would allow the second opinion to be perceived as a valuable resource that broadens the physician-patient relationship and optimizes the shared surgical decision-making process.

Decision regret of cancer patients after radiotherapy: results from a cross-sectional observational study at a large tertiary cancer center in Germany

PURPOSE

The decision-making process regarding cancer treatment is emotionally challenging for patients and families, harboring the risk of decision regret. We aimed to explore prevalence and determinants of decision regret following radiotherapy.

METHODS

This cross-sectional observational study was conducted at a tertiary cancer center to assess decision regret following radiotherapy. The study employed the German version of the Ottawa Decision Regret Scale (DRS) which was validated in the study population. Decision regret was categorized as absent (0 points), mild (1-25 points), and strong (> 25 points). Various psychosocial outcome measures were collected using validated questionnaires to identify factors that may be associated with decision regret.

RESULTS

Out of 320 eligible patients, 212 participated, with 207 completing the DRS. Median age at start of radiotherapy was 64 years [interquartile range (IQR), 56-72], genders were balanced (105 female, 102 male), and the most common cancer types were breast (n = 84; 41%), prostate (n = 57; 28%), and head-and-neck cancer (n = 19; 9%). Radiotherapy was applied with curative intention in 188 patients (91%). Median time between last radiotherapy fraction and questionnaire completion was 23 months (IQR, 1-38). DRS comprehensibility was rated as good or very good by 98% (196 of 201) of patients. Decision regret was reported by 43% (n = 90) as absent, 38% (n = 78) as mild, and 18% (n = 38) as strong. In the multiple regression analysis, poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, low social support, and dissatisfaction with care were independent risk factors for higher decision regret after radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The German version of the DRS could be used to assess decision regret in a diverse cohort of cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy. Decision regret was prevalent in a considerable proportion of patients. Further studies are necessary to validate these findings and obtain causal factors associated with decision regret after radiotherapy.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to personalise follow-up care of ovarian cancer: what do patients think? A qualitative interview study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to explore ovarian cancer patients' preferences regarding follow-up care and, in particular, the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as an approach to personalise follow-up care.

METHODS

Between May and June 2021, semi-structured interviews were conducted with ovarian cancer patients, who had finished their primary treatment at least 6 months prior and were receiving follow-up care at our centre. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using an inductive thematic approach. A thematic flow chart was created describing interacting themes.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients were interviewed, of which 11 were familiar with PROMs. Two key themes emerged from the data: the need for reassurance and the wish for personalised care. A follow-up scheme using PROMs was identified as a separate theme with the potential to personalise care. Several barriers and facilitators of PROMs were mentioned.

CONCLUSIONS

Ovarian cancer patients have a desire for personalised follow-up care and seek reassurance. PROMs may be able to support both of these needs. Future research is needed to determine the most effective, patient-centred way to implement them.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

By understanding what patients' preferences are regarding follow-up care, more initiatives can be set up to personalise follow-up care, through which patient anxiety and dissatisfaction can be reduced.

Assessing Knowledge, Competence, and Performance Following Web-Based Education on Early Breast Cancer Management: Health Care Professional Questionnaire Study and Anonymized Patient Records Analysis

BACKGROUND

Web-based learning activities are key components of continuing medical education (CME) for health care professionals (HCPs). However, the published outcomes of web-based educational interventions for early breast cancer (EBC) are limited.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to objectively assess knowledge, competence, and performance among HCPs following participation in 2 EBC-focused CME activities and to identify the remaining educational gaps.

METHODS

We developed 2 CME-accredited web-based educational activities addressing high-risk EBC, including integration of shared decision-making to optimize patient care (touchMDT) and stratification for early identification of high-risk patients and novel treatment strategies (touchPANEL DISCUSSION). Knowledge, competence, and performance were assessed before and after the activities against an expanded outcomes framework (levels 1-5) using self-reported questionnaires and an analysis of anonymized data extracted from patient records.

RESULTS

Six months after the launch of the activity, 7047 and 8989 HCP participants engaged with touchMDT and touchPANEL DISCUSSION, respectively. The overall satisfaction was 82% (a total score of 20.6 out of 25) for the touchMDT and 88% (a total score of 21.9 out of 25) for the touchPANEL DISCUSSION. For the evaluation of knowledge and competence (50 respondents before the activity and 50 learners after the activity), there was a significant increase in the mean number of correctly answered questions from pre- to postactivity (touchMDT: median 4.0, IQR 3.0-5.0 to median 5.5, IQR 4.0-7.0; mean 4.00, SD 1.39 to mean 5.30, SD 1.56 and touchPANEL DISCUSSION: median 4.0, IQR 4.0-5.0 to median 6.0, IQR 5.0-7.0; mean 4.32, SD 1.30 to mean 5.88, SD 1.49; both P<.001). A significant improvement in self-reported performance (50 respondents before the activity and 50 learners after the activity) was observed in a combined analysis of both activities (median 3.0, IQR 2.0-3.0 to median 4.0, IQR 3.0-5.0; mean 2.82, SD 1.08 to mean 4.16, SD 1.45; P<.001). Patient record analysis (50 respondents before the activity and 50 learners after the activity) showed that the HCPs used a range of measures to determine EBC recurrence risk and revealed no significant differences in adjuvant therapies used before and after the activity (P=.97 and P>.99 for Ki-67 <20% and Ki-67 ≥20% tumors, respectively). The remaining educational gaps included strategies for implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice and the use of genetic and biomarker testing to guide treatment selection.

CONCLUSIONS

Brief, web-based CME activities on EBC were associated with an improvement in HCP knowledge, competence, and self-reported performance and can help identify unmet needs to inform the design of future CME activities.

Patient-reported effects of hospital-wide implementation of shared decision-making at a university medical centre in Germany: a pre-post trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of the SHARE TO CARE (S2C) programme, a complex intervention designed for hospital-wide implementation of shared decision-making (SDM).

DESIGN

Pre-post study.

SETTING

University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein (UKSH), Kiel Campus.

PARTICIPANTS

Healthcare professionals as well as inpatients and outpatients from 22 departments of the Kiel Campus of UKSH.

INTERVENTIONS

The S2C programme is a comprehensive implementation strategy including four core modules: (1) physician training, (2) SDM support training for and support by nurses as decision coaches, (3) patient activation and (4) evidence-based patient decision aid development and integration into patient pathways. After full implementation, departments received the S2C certificate.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

In this paper, we report on the feasibility and effectiveness outcomes of the implementation. Feasibility was judged by the degree of implementation of the four modules of the programme. Outcome measures for effectiveness are patient-reported experience measures (PREMs). The primary outcome measure for effectiveness is the Patient Decision Making subscale of the Perceived Involvement in Care Scale (PICSPDM). Pre-post comparisons were done using t-tests.

RESULTS

The implementation of the four components of the S2C programme was able to be completed in 18 of the 22 included departments within the time frame of the study. After completion of implementation, PICSPDM showed a statistically significant difference (p<0.01) between the means compared with baseline. This difference corresponds to a small to medium yet clinically meaningful positive effect (Hedges' g=0.2). Consistent with this, the secondary PREMs (Preparation for Decision Making and collaboRATE) also showed statistically significant, clinically meaningful positive effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The hospital-wide implementation of SDM with the S2C-programme proved to be feasible and effective within the time frame of the project. The German Federal Joint Committee has recommended to make the Kiel model of SDM a national standard of care.

Physicians' and Patients' Expectations From Digital Agents for Consultations: Interview Study Among Physicians and Patients

BACKGROUND

Physicians are currently overwhelmed by administrative tasks and spend very little time in consultations with patients, which hampers health literacy, shared decision-making, and treatment adherence.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine whether digital agents constructed using fast-evolving generative artificial intelligence, such as ChatGPT, have the potential to improve consultations, adherence to treatment, and health literacy. We interviewed patients and physicians to obtain their opinions about 3 digital agents-a silent digital expert, a communicative digital expert, and a digital companion (DC).

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with 25 patients and 22 physicians from a purposeful sample, with the patients having a wide age range and coming from different educational backgrounds and the physicians having different medical specialties. Transcripts of the interviews were deductively coded using MAXQDA (VERBI Software GmbH) and then summarized according to code and interview before being clustered for interpretation.

RESULTS

Statements from patients and physicians were categorized according to three consultation phases: (1) silent and communicative digital experts that are part of the consultation, (2) digital experts that hand over to a DC, and (3) DCs that support patients in the period between consultations. Overall, patients and physicians were open to these forms of digital support but had reservations about all 3 agents.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultimately, we derived 9 requirements for designing digital agents to support consultations, treatment adherence, and health literacy based on the literature and our qualitative findings.

Integrating Shared Decision-Making into Undergraduate Oncology Education: A Pedagogical Framework

The integration of shared decision-making (SDM) into undergraduate oncology education represents a critical evolution in medical pedagogy, reflecting the growing complexity and patient-centric focus of contemporary healthcare. This paper introduces a comprehensive pedagogical framework designed to embed SDM within the undergraduate medical curriculum, particularly in oncology, where the multiplicity of treatment options and their profound impact on patient life underscore the necessity of this approach. Grounded in a systematic literature review and aligned with established educational theories, this framework proposes twelve strategic approaches to cultivate future physicians proficient in both clinical acumen and patient-collaborative decision-making. The framework emphasizes real-world clinical experience, role-playing, case studies, and decision aids to deepen students' understanding of SDM. It advocates for the development of communication skills, ethical deliberation, and cultural competence, recognizing the multifaceted nature of patient care. The inclusion of patient narratives and evidence-based decision-making further enriches the curriculum, offering a holistic view of patient care. Additionally, the integration of digital tools within the SDM process acknowledges the evolving technological landscape in healthcare. The paper also addresses challenges in implementing this framework, such as curricular constraints and the need for educator training. It underscores the importance of continual evaluation and adaptation of these strategies to the dynamic field of medical education and practice. Overall, this comprehensive approach aims not only to enhance the quality of oncological care but also to prepare medical students for the complexities of modern medicine, where patient involvement in decision-making is both a necessity and an expectation.

Patients' preferences for fracture risk communication: the Risk Communication in Osteoporosis (RICO) study

The RICO study indicated that most patients would like to receive information regarding their fracture risk but that only a small majority have actually received it. Patients globally preferred a visual presentation of fracture risk and were interested in an online tool showing the risk.

PURPOSE

The aim of the Risk Communication in Osteoporosis (RICO) study was to assess patients' preferences regarding fracture risk communication.

METHODS

To assess patients' preferences for fracture risk communication, structured interviews with women with osteoporosis or who were at risk for fracture were conducted in 11 sites around the world, namely in Argentina, Belgium, Canada at Hamilton and with participants from the Osteoporosis Canada Canadian Osteoporosis Patient Network (COPN), Japan, Mexico, Spain, the Netherlands, the UK, and the USA in California and Washington state. The interviews used to collect data were designed on the basis of a systematic review and a qualitative pilot study involving 26 participants at risk of fracture.

RESULTS

A total of 332 women (mean age 67.5 ± 8.0 years, 48% with a history of fracture) were included in the study. Although the participants considered it important to receive information about their fracture risk (mean importance of 6.2 ± 1.4 on a 7-point Likert scale), only 56% (i.e. 185/332) had already received such information. Globally, participants preferred a visual presentation with a traffic-light type of coloured graph of their FRAX® fracture risk probability, compared to a verbal or written presentation. Almost all participants considered it important to discuss their fracture risk and the consequences of fractures with their healthcare professionals in addition to receiving information in a printed format or access to an online website showing their fracture risk.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant communication gap between healthcare professionals and patients when discussing osteoporosis fracture risk. The RICO study provides insight into preferred approaches to rectify this communication gap.

Cost: An Important Question That Must Be Asked

Cost conversations are essential to informed consent because patients have a right to information that they think is relevant, and patients overwhelmingly report that cost information is relevant to their medical decisions. Providers have an ethical responsibility to provide necessary information for informed consent, and therefore must discuss costs. The Shared Decision Making model is ideal for enabling this exchange of information, and decision aids are also helpful. Although barriers exist, many useful tools can help providers fulfill this obligation, and encouraging progress is being made to improve cost transparency from insurers and facilities.

Decision aids for promoting shared decision-making: A review of systematic reviews

In the context of shared decision-making (SDM), experts have advocated the use of validated decision aids (DAs) as valuable tools for facilitating SDM in various healthcare scenarios. This comprehensive review attempts to analyze a vast corpus of DA research by performing thorough searches across four prominent databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science). Independent reviewers selected relevant reviews, extracted data, and assessed review quality using the AMSTAR II tool. A total of 34 systematic reviews were identified and evaluated in this review, encompassing a wide range of outcomes associated with using DAs. These outcomes include patient knowledge, patient involvement in SDM, decision conflict, decision regret, satisfaction, and adherence. In addition, DAs positively affect healthcare provider outcomes by increasing satisfaction, reducing decision conflicts, and lengthening clinical consultations. This review highlights the need for additional research in specific contexts such as long-term care, mental health, and reproductive health to better understand the benefits and challenges of implementing DAs in these settings. Such research can contribute to the improvement of SDM practices and patient-centered care.

Sharing a medical decision

During the last decades, shared decision making (SDM) has become a very popular model for the physician-patient relationship. SDM can refer to a process (making a decision in a shared way) and a product (making a shared decision). In the literature, by far most attention is devoted to the process. In this paper, I investigate the product, wondering what is involved by a medical decision being shared. I argue that the degree to which a decision to implement a medical alternative is shared should be determined by taking into account six considerations: (i) how the physician and the patient rank that alternative, (ii) the individual preference scores the physician and the patient (would) assign to that alternative, (iii) the similarity of the preference scores, (iv) the similarity of the rankings, (v) the total concession size, and (vi) the similarity of the concession sizes. I explain why shared medical decisions are valuable, and sketch implications of the analysis for the physician-patient relationship.

Codesign of Lynch ChoicesTM : Using implementation science to create a clinically deliverable patient decision support website to transform cancer genetics care pathways

BACKGROUND

Resources including Patient Decision Aids (PtDA) are useful and valued by patients and clinicians to provide information and complement shared decision-making. Despite their promise, few PtDA exist for patients with genetic cancer susceptibility facing difficult decisions about risk management. We aimed to fill this gap, partnering with patients to codesign Lynch ChoicesTM , a PtDA website for families with Lynch Syndrome. In addition to a Patient Reference Panel, we purposively invited an international stakeholder panel including charities, public bodies, clinical and academic experts. Implementation strategies and frameworks were employed to optimise translation of research findings to improve care.

METHODS

Patient/stakeholder suggestions were incorporated in a transparent Table of Changes and prioritised using the Person-Based Approach throughout planning and codesign of Lynch ChoicesTM . An interactive stakeholder meeting was convened to identify barriers and facilitators to clinical implementation of the PtDA.

RESULTS

Patient and stakeholder partnerships drove the direction of the research throughout codesign, resulting in several iterative refinements to the PtDA prior to roll out including the addition of illustrations/videos, clearer presentation of cancer risks and increased accessibility for lower literacy. Barriers and facilitators identified from stakeholders were used to create an implementation process map.

CONCLUSIONS

Creating an effective, engaging PtDA is not enough. Systematic uptake in real world clinical practice, with its resource limitations, is needed to optimise benefit to patients and clinicians. Assessment of speed and breadth of dissemination and usage will be collected to further evidence the benefit of embedding implementation science methods from the outset to translate research findings into clinical practice.