A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Patient Decision Aids for Socially Disadvantaged Populations: Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS)

Understanding Symptom Self-Monitoring Needs Among Postpartum Black Patients: Qualitative Interview Study

BACKGROUND

Pregnancy-related death is on the rise in the United States, and there are significant disparities in outcomes for Black patients. Most solutions that address pregnancy-related death are hospital based, which rely on patients recognizing symptoms and seeking care from a health system, an area where many Black patients have reported experiencing bias. There is a need for patient-centered solutions that support and encourage postpartum people to seek care for severe symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the design needs for a mobile health (mHealth) patient-reported outcomes and decision-support system to assist Black patients in assessing when to seek medical care for severe postpartum symptoms. These findings may also support different perinatal populations and minoritized groups in other clinical settings.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with 36 participants-15 (42%) obstetric health professionals, 10 (28%) mental health professionals, and 11 (31%) postpartum Black patients. The interview questions included the following: current practices for symptom monitoring, barriers to and facilitators of effective monitoring, and design requirements for an mHealth system that supports monitoring for severe symptoms. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. We analyzed transcripts using directed content analysis and the constant comparative process. We adopted a thematic analysis approach, eliciting themes deductively using conceptual frameworks from health behavior and human information processing, while also allowing new themes to inductively arise from the data. Our team involved multiple coders to promote reliability through a consensus process.

RESULTS

Our findings revealed considerations related to relevant symptom inputs for postpartum support, the drivers that may affect symptom processing, and the design needs for symptom self-monitoring and patient decision-support interventions. First, participants viewed both somatic and psychological symptom inputs as important to capture. Second, self-perception; previous experience; sociocultural, financial, environmental, and health systems-level factors were all perceived to impact how patients processed, made decisions about, and acted upon their symptoms. Third, participants provided recommendations for system design that involved allowing for user control and freedom. They also stressed the importance of careful wording of decision-support messages, such that messages that recommend them to seek care convey urgency but do not provoke anxiety. Alternatively, messages that recommend they may not need care should make the patient feel heard and reassured.

CONCLUSIONS

Future solutions for postpartum symptom monitoring should include both somatic and psychological symptoms, which may require combining existing measures to elicit symptoms in a nuanced manner. Solutions should allow for varied, safe interactions to suit individual needs. While mHealth or other apps may not be able to address all the social or financial needs of a person, they may at least provide information, so that patients can easily access other supportive resources.

Preliminary testing of "roadmap to parenthood" decision aid and planning tool for family building after cancer: Results of a single-arm pilot study

OBJECTIVE

Many young adult female cancer survivors need to use reproductive medicine, surrogacy, or adoption to have a child. This study pilot tested Roadmap to Parenthood, a web-based, self-guided decision aid and planning tool for family building after cancer (disease agnostic).

METHODS

A single-arm pilot study tested feasibility, acceptability, and obtained effect size estimates of the Roadmap tool. Participants, recruited via hospital-based and social media strategies, completed a baseline survey (T1), accessed the Roadmap tool (website), then completed surveys at one- and 3-months (T2 and T3, respectively). Feasibility and acceptability were evaluated with rates of eligibility, enrollment, and survey completion, and feedback. Pairwise t-tests and repeated measures ANOVA evaluated usage effects. Effect size estimates were calculated.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 98) averaged 31 years old (SD = 5.61); 71% were nulliparous. Enrollment rate was 73%, T1-T2 completion rate was 80%, and 93% accessed the website. From T1-T2, participants reported improvements in decisional conflict (p < 0.001; Cohen's d = 0.85), unmet information needs (p < 0.001; Cohen's d = 0.70), self-efficacy (p = 0.003; Cohen's d = 0.40), and self-efficacy for managing negative emotions (p = 0.03; Cohen's d = 0.29); effects were sustained at T3. There was no change in reproductive distress (p = 0.22). By T3, 94% reported increased consideration of preparatory actions and 20%-61% completed such actions.

CONCLUSIONS

The Roadmap intervention was feasible to conduct, acceptable to users, and led to improvements in key psychosocial outcomes. Future directions will test intervention efficacy in a randomized controlled trial with a larger sample and over a longer period. A web-based tool may help women make decisions about family building after cancer and prepare for potential challenges.

Interventions to improve oncofertility knowledge and decision-making in patients with low health literacy: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of interventions that improve knowledge, health and decision-related outcomes in cancer, fertility or the intersection of both among low health literacy (LHL) patients.

METHODS

Articles published from 2000 to March 2022 in English were identified through searching MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and Embase databases on 29/03/2022. Studies were independently screened against eligibility criteria and appraised for quality. A narrative synthesis of data was presented.

RESULTS

Of 235 citations, 11 studies (2585 participants) investigating three categories were included: decision-support tools (n = 8), mobile health applications (n = 2) and communication tools (n = 1). No eligible study was identified for fertility or oncofertility. All interventions integrated multimedia or interactivity to supplement plain-language text. Decision aids and mobile health applications improved knowledge, reduced decisional conflict and increased clarity around cancer-related choices. Overall, findings favoured the use of online interventions tailored for LHL patients.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of data on LHL interventions in fertility and oncofertility. In cancer, LHL interventions improved knowledge and decision-making outcomes. The ideal intervention remains inconclusive.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Lack of engagement with LHL needs in oncofertility and fertility settings have implications for informed treatment decision-making. In cancer, further research is required to ascertain most effective intervention format.

Shared Decision Making in Hallux Valgus Surgery: A Prospective Observational Study

Patient-physician communication has the potential to improve outcomes and satisfaction through the shared decision-making process (SDM). This study aims to assess the relationship between perception of SDM and demographic, clinical, and patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing Hallux Valgus (HV) correction. A prospective analysis of 306 patients scheduled for HV surgery was completed. The CollaboRATE score was used to measure SDM. Multivariable linear regression model was used to assess whether SDM scores were associated with preoperative characteristics or postoperative outcome scores. The mean CollaboRATE score was 2.9 (SD 0.9) and did not differ by age, socioeconomic status, or sex. Lower CollaboRATE scores were associated with more symptoms of depression, lower socioeconomic status, and lower general health scores (p-value < 0.05). There was no association between SDM scores and postoperative outcome scores. In this study, patients with depressive symptoms and lower socioeconomic status had worse perceptions of SDM. There was no difference in postoperative outcomes among participants based on SDM scores. Level of Evidence: Level III, prospective observational study.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

Should I take aspirin? A qualitative study on the implementation of a decision aid on taking aspirin for bowel cancer prevention

OBJECTIVES

Australian guidelines recommend 50-70 years consider taking aspirin to reduce their bowel cancer risk. We trialled a decision aid in general practice to facilitate the implementation of these guidelines into clinical practice. This publication reports on the qualitative results from the process evaluation of the trial. We aimed to explore general practitioners' (GPs) and their patients' approach to shared decision-making (SDM) about taking aspirin to prevent bowel cancer and how the decision aids were used in practice.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with 17 participants who received the decision aid and 12 GPs who participated in the trial between June and November 2021. The interviews were coded inductively, and emerging themes were mapped onto the Revised Programme Theory for SDM.

RESULTS

The study highlighted the dynamics of SDM for taking aspirin to prevent bowel cancer. Some participants discussed the decision aid with their GPs as advised prior to taking aspirin, others either took aspirin or dismissed it outright without discussing it with their GPs. Notably, participants' trust in their GPs, and participants' diverse worldviews played pivotal roles in their decisions. Although the decision aid supported SDM for some, it was not always prioritised in a consultation. This was likely impacted during the trial period as the COVID-19 pandemic was the focus for general practice.

CONCLUSION

In summary, this study illustrated the complexities of SDM through using a decision aid in general practice to implement the guidelines for low-dose aspirin to prevent bowel cancer. While the decision aid prompted some participants to speak to their GPs, they were also heavily influenced by their unwavering trust in the GPs and their different worldviews. In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, SDM was not highly prioritised. This study provides insights into the implementation of guidelines into clinical practice and highlights the need for ongoing support and prioritisation of cancer prevention in general practice consultations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12620001003965.

Engagement of Older Adults Receiving Home Care Services and Their Caregivers in Health Decisions in Partnership With Clinical Teams: Protocol for a Multimethod Study to Prioritize and Culturally Adapt Decision Aids for Home Care

BACKGROUND

Older adults (people aged 65 years and older) face many difficult decisions. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) can help them and their families make informed value-congruent decisions. Some PtDAs have been developed for the home care context, but little is known about scaling them for use with older adults in a different culture.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to (1) assess the scalability of existing PtDAs for older adults in the home care context; (2) prioritize those that best match the decisional needs of older adults in home care; and (3) culturally adapt the prioritized PtDAs so they can be scaled successfully to the Quebec health care system.

METHODS

This multimethod study includes 3 phases. All phases will be overseen by a steering committee of older adults, caregivers, health professionals, decision makers, community organization representatives, and researchers with the needed expertise. In phase 1, we will use the Innovation Scalability Self-administered Questionnaire, a validated scalability self-assessment tool, to assess the scalability of 33 PtDAs previously identified in a systematic review. Based on their scalability, their quality (based on the International Patient Decision Aids Standards), and the importance of the decision point, we will retain approximately a third of these. In phase 2, we will conduct a 2-round web-based Delphi to prioritize the PtDAs selected in phase 1. Using a snowball recruitment strategy, we aim to recruit 60 Delphi participants in the province of Quebec, including older adults, caregivers, health professionals, decision makers involved in home care services, and PtDA experts. In the first round, we will ask participants to rate the importance of several PtDA decision points according to various criteria such as prevalence and difficulty on a 5-point Likert scale (1=not important to 5=very important). Approximately 6 of the highest-rated PtDAs will be retained for presentation in the second round, and we will select up to 3 PtDAs judged as having the highest priority for cultural adaptation. In phase 3, using the Chenel framework and user-centered design methods, we will update and adapt the PtDAs to the Quebec health care system and integrate these PtDAs into an interprofessional shared decision-making training program for home care teams. The adapted PtDAs will respect the International Patient Decision Aids Standards criteria.

RESULTS

This study was funded in March 2022 by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Data collection for the web-based Delphi began in October 2023. Results are expected to be published in May 2024.

CONCLUSIONS

This project will provide relevant and culturally appropriate decision support tools for older adults making difficult decisions and their home care teams that will be ready for scaling across the province of Quebec.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/53150.

The impact of eHealth on relationships and trust in primary care: a review of reviews

BACKGROUND

Given the increasing integration of digital health technologies in team-based primary care, this review aimed at understanding the impact of eHealth on patient-provider and provider-provider relationships.

METHODS

A review of reviews was conducted on three databases to identify papers published in English from 2008 onwards. The impact of different types of eHealth on relationships and trust and the factors influencing the impact were thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 79 reviews were included. Patient-provider relationships were discussed more frequently as compared to provider-provider relationships. Communication systems like telemedicine were the most discussed type of technology. eHealth was found to have both positive and negative impacts on relationships and/or trust. This impact was influenced by a range of patient-related, provider-related, technology-related, and organizational factors, such as patient sociodemographics, provider communication skills, technology design, and organizational technology implementation, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations are provided for effective and equitable technology selection, application, and training to optimize the impact of eHealth on relationships and trust. The review findings can inform providers' and policymakers' decision-making around the use of eHealth in primary care delivery to facilitate relationship-building.

Using Patient Decision Aids for Cardiology Care in Diverse Populations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Patient decision aids (PDAs) are tools that help guide treatment decisions and support shared decision-making when there is equipoise between treatment options. This review focuses on decision aids that are available to support cardiac treatment options for underrepresented groups.

RECENT FINDINGS

PDAs have been developed to support multiple treatment decisions in cardiology related to coronary artery disease, valvular heart disease, cardiac arrhythmias, heart failure, and cholesterol management. By considering the unique needs and preferences of diverse populations, PDAs can enhance patient engagement and promote equitable healthcare delivery in cardiology. In this review, we examine the benefits, challenges, and current trends in implementing PDAs, with a focus on improving decision-making processes and outcomes for patients from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. In addition, the article highlights key considerations when implementing PDAs and potential future directions in the field.

The Intersection of Health Literacy and Public Health: A Machine Learning-Enhanced Bibliometric Investigation

In recent decades, health literacy has garnered increasing attention alongside a variety of public health topics. This study aims to explore trends in this area through a bibliometric analysis. A Random Forest Model was utilized to identify keywords and other metadata that predict average citations in the field. To supplement this machine learning analysis, we have also implemented a bibliometric review of the corpus. Our findings reveal significant positive coefficients for the keywords "COVID-19" and "Male", underscoring the influence of the pandemic and potential gender-related factors in the literature. On the other hand, the keyword "Female" showed a negative coefficient, hinting at possible disparities that warrant further investigation. Additionally, evolving themes such as COVID-19, mental health, and social media were discovered. A significant change was observed in the main publishing journals, while the major contributing authors remained the same. The results hint at the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic and a significant association between gender-related keywords on citation likelihood, as well as changing publication strategies, despite the fact that the main researchers remain those who have been studying health literacy since its creation.

Greater fertility distress and avoidance relate to poorer decision making about family building after cancer among adolescent and young adult female survivors

BACKGROUND

Many adolescent and young adult female (AYA-F) cancer survivors face decisions about family building using reproductive medicine or adoption to achieve parenthood. This study evaluated associations among reproductive distress, avoidance, and family-building decision making and identified sociodemographic and clinical characteristics related to high distress and avoidance.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey assessed AYA-F survivors' oncofertility experiences. Measures included an investigator-designed Unmet Information Needs scale, Reproductive Concerns After Cancer Scale, Impact of Events Scale-Avoidance subscale, Decision Self-Efficacy scale, and Decision Conflict Scale. Two linear regression models evaluated correlates of decision self-efficacy and decisional conflict about family building after cancer. Bivariate analyses evaluated correlates of avoidance using Pearson's correlation, t-test, and ANOVA.

RESULTS

AYA-Fs (N = 111) averaged 31-years-old (SD = 5.49) and 3 years post-treatment (range: 1-23 years); 90% were nulliparous. Most common diagnoses were leukemia (24%) and breast cancer (22%). Average decisional conflict was 52.12 (SD = 23.87, range: 0-100); 74% of the sample reported DCS scores within the clinically significant range. Higher levels of reproductive distress (B = -0.23, p = 0.04) and avoidance (B = -0.24, p = 0.02) related to lower decision self-efficacy. Younger age (B = -0.18, p = 0.03), greater unmet information needs (B = 0.33, p < 0.001), and higher levels of reproductive distress (B = 0.34, p = 0.001) related to worse decisional conflict. Predictors of distress and avoidance were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

After cancer treatment, high fertility distress and avoidant coping were associated with poorer quality decision making about family building after cancer. Fertility counseling post-treatment should support self-efficacy and constructive coping skills to counteract high distress, maladaptive coping, and facilitate values-based decision making.

Decision aids to assist patients and professionals in choosing the right treatment for kidney failure

Background

Kidney services vary in the way they involve people with kidney failure (PwKF) in treatment decisions as management needs change. We discuss how decision-science applications support proactively PwKF to make informed decisions between treatment options with kidney professionals.

Methods

A conceptual review of findings about decision making and use of decision aids in kidney services, synthesized with reference to: the Making Informed Decisions-Individually and Together (MIND-IT) multiple stakeholder decision makers framework; and the Medical Research Council-Complex Intervention Development and Evaluation research framework.

Results

This schema represents the different types of decision aids that support PwKF and professional reasoning as they manage kidney disease individually and together; adjustments at micro, meso and macro levels supports integration in practice.

Conclusion

Innovating services to meet clinical guidelines on enhancing shared decision making processes means enabling all stakeholders to use decision aids to meet their goals within kidney pathways at individual, service and organizational levels.

Mixed-Method Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Shared Decision-Making Tools for Cancer Screening

This review aimed to synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of shared decision-making (SDM) tools for cancer screening and explored the preferences of vulnerable people and clinicians regarding the specific characteristics of the SDM tools. A mixed-method convergent segregated approach was employed, which involved an independent synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data. Articles were systematically selected and screened, resulting in the inclusion and critical appraisal of 55 studies. Results from the meta-analysis revealed that SDM tools were more effective for improving knowledge, reducing decisional conflict, and increasing screening intentions among vulnerable populations compared to non-vulnerable populations. Subgroup analyses showed minimal heterogeneity for decisional conflict outcomes measured over a six-month period. Insights from the qualitative findings revealed the complexities of clinicians' and vulnerable populations' preferences for an SDM tool in cancer screening. Vulnerable populations highly preferred SDM tools with relevant information, culturally tailored content, and appropriate communication strategies. Clinicians, on the other hand, highly preferred tools that can be easily integrated into their medical systems for efficient use and can effectively guide their practice for cancer screening while considering patients' values. Considering the complexities of patients' and clinicians' preferences in SDM tool characteristics, fostering collaboration between patients and clinicians during the creation of an SDM tool for cancer screening is essential. This collaboration may ensure effective communication about the specific tool characteristics that best support the needs and preferences of both parties.

Development and pilot test of a pregnancy decision making tool for women with physical disabilities

OBJECTIVE

Design and pilot test a new decision making tool for women with physical disabilities (impairment of physical function due to chronic conditions) considering pregnancy.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

Quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews were collected from participants living in the community.

STUDY DESIGN

Clinical guidelines and survey and focus group data about pregnancy informational and decisional needs guided content development. The tool was pilot tested in a 12-week trial with participants with physical disabilities considering or actively planning a pregnancy. Feasibility outcomes were acceptability, implementation, and demand (collected at end of the trial); preliminary efficacy focused on decisional conflict and readiness (baseline, 6 weeks, and end of trial).

DATA COLLECTION

Survey data were collected using an online form. One-on-one interviews were conducted to learn more about experience using the tool.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Thirty eight participants with mild, moderate, or severe physical disabilities participated. Feasibility outcomes indicated that the tool provided participants with information, guiding questions, and helped them to consider multiple aspects of the decision about pregnancy. Most participants responded positively to the new decision making tool, finding it easy to use and the information balanced. Feedback highlighted opportunity for improvement, such as more specific information, peer stories, and the limitations of a paper format. There was significant linear effect of time, with increased decisional certainty and readiness, values clarity, and decisional support (partial η2 [90% CI] = 0.310 [0.08, 0.46], 0.435 [0.19, 0.60], 0.134 [0, 0.29], 0.178 [0.01, 0.35], respectively). Decisional certainty and readiness had high observed power (96.7% and 99.3%, respectively) with lower observed power for clarity and support (60.6% and 75.1%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The new tool shows promise for supporting women with physical disabilities in navigating pregnancy decision making. Future development of complementary strategies to support health care providers will help improve shared decision making and patient-centered care.

Is Social Deprivation Associated With Usage, Adverse Events, and Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

To capture various social determinants of health, recent analyses have used comprehensive measures of socioeconomic disadvantage such as deprivation and vulnerability indices. Given that studies evaluating the effects of social deprivation on total joint arthroplasty (TJA) have yielded mixed results, a systematic review of this relationship might help answer questions about usage, complications, and results after surgery among patients in different socioeconomic groups and help guide targeted approaches to ensure health equity.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We asked: How is social deprivation associated with TJA (1) usage, (2) adverse events including discharge deposition and length of stay, and (3) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)?

METHODS

A comprehensive review of the PubMed, EBSCO host, Medline, and Google Scholar electronic databases was conducted to identify all studies that evaluated social deprivation and TJA between January 1, 2000, and March 1, 2022. Studies were included if they evaluated comprehensive measures of socioeconomic deprivation rather than individual social determinants of health. Nineteen articles were included in our final analysis with a total of 757,522 patients. In addition to characteristics of included studies (such as patient population, procedure evaluated, and utilized social deprivation metric), we recorded TJA usage, adverse events, and PROM values as reported by each article. Two reviewers independently evaluated the quality of included studies using the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) tool. The mean ± SD MINORS score was 13 ± 1 of 16, with higher scores representing better study quality. All the articles included are noncomparative studies. Given the heterogeneity of the included studies, a meta-analysis was not performed and results were instead presented descriptively.

RESULTS

Although there were inconsistencies among the included articles, higher levels of social deprivation were associated with lower TJA usage even after controlling for various confounding variables. Similarly, there was agreement among studies regarding higher proportion of nonhome discharge for patients with more social deprivation. Although there was limited agreement across studies regarding whether patients with more social deprivation had differences in their baseline and postoperative PROMs scores, patients with more social deprivation had lower improvements from baseline for most of the included articles.

CONCLUSION

These findings encourage continued efforts focusing on appropriate patient education regarding expectations related to functional improvement and the postoperative recovery process, as well as resources available for further information and social support. We suggest linking patient data to deprivation measures such as the Area Deprivation Index to help encourage shared decision-making strategies that focus on health literacy and common barriers related to access. Given the potential influence social deprivation may have on the outcome and utilization of TJA, hospitals should identify methods to determine patients who are more socially deprived and provide targeted interventions to help patients overcome any social deprivation they are facing. We encourage physicians to maintain close communication with patients whose circumstances include more severe levels of social deprivation to ensure they have access to the appropriate resources. Additionally, as multiple social deprivation metrics are being used in research, future studies should identify a consistent metric to ensure all patients that are socially deprived are reliably identified to receive appropriate treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Developing an Educational and Decision Support Tool for Stage I Lung Cancer Using Decision Science

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend shared decision-making about treatment options for high-risk, operable stage I lung cancer. Patient decision aids can facilitate shared decision-making; however, their development, implementation, and evaluation in routine clinical practice presents numerous challenges and opportunities.

METHODS

The purpose of this review is to reflect on the process of tool development; identify the challenges associated with meeting the needs of patients, clinicians from multiple disciplines, and institutional workflow during implementation; and propose recommendations for future clinicians who wish to develop, refine, or implement similar tools into routine care.

RESULTS

In this review, we: (1) discuss guidelines for decision aid development; (2) describe how we applied those to create an education and decision support tool for patients with clinical stage I lung cancer deciding between radiation therapy and surgical resection; and (3) highlight challenges in implementing and evaluating the tool.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide recommendations for those seeking to develop, refine, or implement similar tools into routine care.

Effects and Working Mechanisms of a Multilevel Implementation Program for Applying Shared Decision-Making while Discussing Systemic Treatment in Breast Cancer

Background: Enhancing the application of shared decision-making (SDM) is critical for integrating patient preferences in breast cancer treatment choices. We investigated the effect of an adapted multilevel SDM implementation program in breast cancer care. Methods: Breast cancer patients qualifying for (neo)adjuvant systemic treatment were included in a multicenter before−after study. Consultations were audio recorded between June 2018 and July 2019 and analyzed using the five-item Observing Patient Involvement in Decision-Making (OPTION-5) instrument to score SDM application by clinicians. The Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) was used to rate patients’ perceived SDM level. Consultation duration, decision types, number of options discussed and consultations per patient were monitored. Regression analysis was used to investigate the correlated variables and program components. Results: Mean OPTION-5 scores increased from 33.9 (n = 63) before implementation to 54.3 (n = 49) after implementation (p < 0.001). The SDM-Q-9 scores did not change: 91.1 (n = 51) at baseline versus 88.9 (n = 23) after implementation (p = 0.81). Without increasing consultation time, clinicians discussed more options after implementation. The regression analysis showed that exposure to the implementation program, redistribution of tasks and discussing feedback from consultations was associated with a higher level of SDM. Conclusion: The multilevel program helped clinicians achieve clinically relevant improvement in SDM, especially when it is tailored to (individuals in) teams and includes (e-)training, discussing feedback on consultations and redistribution of tasks.

Physicians’ perspectives on using a patient decision aid in female stress urinary incontinence

Introduction and hypothesis

A treatment choice for female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is preference sensitive for both patients and physicians. Multiple treatment options are available, with none being superior to any other. The decision-making process can be supported by a patient decision aid (PDA). We aimed to assess physicians’ perceptions concerning the use of a PDA.

Methods

In a mixed methods study, urologists, gynecologists and general practitioners in the Netherlands were asked to fill out a web-based questionnaire. Questions were based on the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases checklist using the following domains: guideline factors, individual health professional factors, professional interactions, incentives and resources, and capacity for organizational change. Participants were asked to grade statements using a five-point Likert scale and to answer open questions on facilitators of and barriers to implementation of a PDA. Outcomes of statement rating were quantitatively analyzed and thematic analysis was performed on the outcomes regarding facilitators and barriers.

Results

The response rate was 11%, with a total of 120 participants completing the questionnaire. Ninety-two of the physicians (77%) would use a PDA in female SUI. Evidence-based and unbiased content, the ability to support shared decision making, and patient empowerment are identified as main facilitators. Barriers are the expected prolonged time investment and the possible difficulty using the PDA in less health-literate patient populations.

Conclusions

The majority of physicians would use a PDA for female SUI. We identified facilitators and barriers that can be used when developing and implementing such a PDA.

Shared decision-making in the management of hereditary angioedema: An analysis of patient and physician perspectives

Background: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare genetic disorder characterized by recurrent, localized episodes of edema. Current treatment guidelines highlight the importance of shared decision-making (SDM) during implementation of HAE management plans. Objective: To determine what constitutes a successful SDM approach in HAE management. Method: Qualitative telephone interviews, which lasted ∼1 hour, were conducted with four HAE physicians and four patients from the APeX-S trial. The physicians were asked to describe the structure and/or content of typical HAE prophylaxis consultations and factors to consider when selecting medications for long-term treatment. Insights from these interviews were used to develop an SDM process diagram. The patients were interviewed to assess how closely the diagram fit their perspectives on the HAE consultation and their involvement in decisions that concerned their care. Interview transcripts were assessed by the interviewer to determine the degree of SDM involvement in each consultation by using qualitative criteria from the literature. Results: Two physicians followed a high-SDM format, and one physician used a "blended" approach. The fourth physician followed a standard (low SDM) format. A successful SDM approach was found to require pre-visit planning, a commitment on behalf of the physician to use SDM methods to learn more about the patient, and empowerment of the patient to reflect on and vocalize his or her preferences and/or needs. Patients engaged in SDM were more likely to proactively request a treatment switch. Conclusion: The adoption of validated HAE-specific treatment decision aids, as well as measures to change the mindsets of patients and physicians, may facilitate successful implementation of SDM in HAE.Clinical Trial Registration: The APeX-S trial was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03472040).

Decision aids linked to the recommendations in clinical practice guidelines: results of the acceptability of a decision aid for patients with generalized anxiety disorder

Background

Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most prevalent mental health problems. Patients with GAD have unmet needs related to the information received about their disorder, its treatments and their participation in the decision-making process. The aim of this study is to develop and assess the acceptability of a patient decision aid (PtDA) for patients with GAD.

Method

The PtDA was developed following the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. The recommendations of the Spanish clinical practice guideline (CPG) for patients with GAD were used as the basis. The first prototype was developed by an expert committee, further improvements were made with patients (n = 2), clinical experts (n = 13) and the project management group (n = 7). The acceptability of this second draft was assessed by patients non-involved in the previous phases (n = 11).

Results

The final PtDA version included a brief description of GAD and its treatments. Most participants agreed that the PtDA was easy to use, visually appealing and useful. At least half of the participants learned new things about treatments and adverse effects.

Conclusions

A PtDA was developed for patients with GAD based on recommendations from the Spanish CPG. It was improved and accepted by patients and clinical experts involved. An evaluation of its effectiveness on the shared decision-making process during the clinical encounter is planned.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-022-01899-2.

Systematic review of effectiveness and quality assessment of patient education materials and decision aids for breathlessness

BACKGROUND

Around 10% of adults suffer from clinically significant breathlessness. High quality and actionable patient education materials (PEMs) and patient decision aids (PDAs) have an important role for shared decision making and patient self-management.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically assess the effectiveness of patient education materials (PEMs) and patient decision aids (PDAs) on clinical outcomes. Secondly, to assess the quality of PEMs and PDAs for breathlessness that are accessible online.

METHODS

A systematic review of PEM or PDA intervention for breathlessness published between 1 January 2010 and November 2020 was conducted. An environmental scan and quality assessment of publicly available PEMs and PDAs was also conducted.

RESULTS

Out of 2985 records, five studies were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review. Results of two randomised controlled trials suggest potential effectiveness of PEMs to improve patient reported outcomes and reduce healthcare utilization. In the environmental scan, 88 materials were included. Minimum reading age for most was high (Grade 10) and PEMs scored an average of 87% for understandability and 67% for actionability. Based on the DISCERN tool only 10 were classified as high quality.

CONCLUSION

There is a paucity of evidence on the effectiveness of PEMs and PDAs for improvement in breathlessness. There is a need to develop higher quality PEMs for breathlessness.

Perspectives on Aging and End of Life Among Lower Socioeconomic Status (SES) Older Adults

Objective: To explore the experiences of aging that influence perceptions of and receptivity to planning for aging and EOL among lower SES older adults. Methods: Supported by a frailty-focused communication educational aid, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 older adults residing in income-assisted housing. Follow-up interviews were conducted 2 weeks later. Descriptive content analysis was performed. Results: Participants mean age was 62.4, and 75% were African American. Six categories emerged to create a narrative of lower SES older adults' experiences, including (1) readiness to plan for aging and EOL, (2) interaction with the healthcare system, (3) daily life with insufficient resources, (4) the role of religiosity, (5) relationships with others, and (6) motivation and health status. Discussion: Life course vulnerabilities and struggles of lower SES older adults preclude opportunities to proactively plan for aging and EOL. Holistic interventions and innovative approaches are needed to address aging across the life course.

Collaboration and Shared Decision-Making Between Patients and Clinicians in Preventive Health Care Decisions and US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) works to improve the health of people nationwide by making evidence-based recommendations for preventive services. Patient-centered care is a core value in US health care. Shared decision-making (SDM), in which patients and clinicians make health decisions together, ensures patients' rights to be informed and involved in preventive care decisions and that these decisions are patient-centered. SDM has a role across the spectrum of USPSTF recommendations. For A or B recommendations (judged by the USPSTF to have high or moderate certainty of a moderate or substantial net benefit at the population level), SDM allows individual patients to decide whether to accept such services based on their personal values and preferences. For C recommendations (indicating at least moderate certainty of a small net benefit at the population level), SDM is critical for individual patients to decide whether the net benefit for them is worthwhile. For D recommendations (reflecting at least moderate certainty of a zero or negative net benefit) or I statements (low certainty of net benefit), clinicians should be prepared to discuss these services if patients ask. More evidence is needed to determine if, in addition to promoting patient-centeredness, SDM reduces inequities in preventive care, as well as to define new strategies to find time for discussion of preventive services in primary care.