Effectiveness of individual feedback and coaching on shared decision-making consultations in oncology care: Study protocol for a randomized clinical trial (Preprint)

Nationwide implementation of the international multidisciplinary best-practice for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-4): study protocol

BACKGROUND

The introduction of (m)FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel has changed the perspective for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Consequently, in experienced centres 23% of patients with LAPC undergo a resection with 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of up to 25%. In the Netherlands, the nationwide resection rate for LAPC remains low at 8%. The PREOPANC-4 program aims for a nationwide implementation of the international multidisciplinary best-practice to improve patient outcome.

METHODS

Nationwide program implementing the international multidisciplinary best-practice for LAPC. In the training phase, multidisciplinary and surgical webinars are given by 4 international experts, leading to a clinical protocol, followed by surgical off-site and on-site proctoring sessions. In the implementation phase, the clinical protocol will be implemented in all centres, including a nationwide expert panel (2022-2024). Healthcare professionals will be trained in shared decision-making. Consecutive patients diagnosed with pathology-proven LAPC (i.e., arterial involvement > 90° and/or portomesenteric venous > 270° involvement or occlusion [DPCG criteria]) are eligible. Primary outcomes are median and 5-year OS from diagnosis, resection rate, in-hospital/30-day mortality and major morbidity (i.e., Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ IIIa), and radical resection (R0) rate. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, functioning, side effects, and patients' healthcare satisfaction in all included patients. Outcomes will be compared with patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) treated with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in the PREOPANC-2 trial (EudraCT: 2017-002036-17) and a historical cohort of patients with LAPC from the PACAP registry (NCT03513705). The existing prospective LAPC Registry and PACAP PROMs (NCT03513705) will be used for data collection. In qualitative interviews, treatment preferences, values, and experiences of LAPC patients, their relatives, and healthcare professionals will be assessed for the development of shared decision-making supportive tools. It is hypothesized that the program will double the nationwide LAPC resection rate to 16% with major morbidity < 50% and mortality ≤ 5%, and OS following resection similar to that observed in patients with BRPC.

DISCUSSION

The PREOPANC-4 program aims to safely implement the international multidisciplinary best-practice for LAPC leading to benchmark outcomes for both short-term morbidity, mortality, and OS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PREOPANC-4 program was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05524090) on September 1, 2022.

A Joanna Briggs Institute Framework Approach to Shared Decision Making in End-of-Life

AIM

To implement shared decision-making (SDM) through a patient decision aid (PtDA) for the initiation of palliative care (PC) in end-of-life (EOL) cancer patients.

METHODOLOGY

A comprehensive Scoping Review was conducted on SDM in PubMed, CINAHL and PsycInfo. An evidence-based implementation of PtDAs was created using the Joanna Briggs Institute framework, which followed rigorous pillars: (1) context, (2) facilitation and (3) evaluation.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were identified and categorised into (1) Implementation characteristics and (2) Strategies for implementing SDM in terminally ill cancer patients. SDM should consider the decision-making location, optimal timing, participants and decision type. Strategies include professional training, PtDAs and implementation programmes. A PtDA implementation protocol in video format for deciding to initiate PC is proposed, following International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) and Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG).

CONCLUSIONS

SDM implementation should be guided by evidence-based methodological models justifying and structuring its execution, especially in complex and interdisciplinary contexts. National or international frameworks facilitate the adoption of health innovations, such as PtDAs, benefiting patients and improving their usage.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

SDM is not just a concept but an important approach to the Care of cancer patients at EOL, enhancing patient satisfaction and improving care quality. The success and sustainability of SDM hinge on the fundamental aspects of staff training, interdisciplinary collaboration and ongoing evaluation. The lack of specific aid in Spanish underscores the immediate need for local development. Further research is needed in this area, as most reviewed studies did not measure SDM effectiveness in diverse hospital settings.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This proposal was developed based on the experience and input of the nursing staff from the healthcare service where it is intended to be implemented.

Shared decision-making in undergraduate nursing and medical education: An explorative dual-method study

OBJECTIVE

This study explores how shared decision-making (SDM) is integrated in undergraduate nursing and medical education.

METHODS

A dual-method design was applied. The integration of SDM in medicine and nursing education programs (i.e. SDM on paper) was explored through document analyses; the integration of SDM in curricula (i.e. SDM in class) through interviews with teachers and curriculum coordinators (N = 19).

RESULTS

A majority of the education programs featured SDM, mostly non-explicit. In curricula SDM was generally implicitly featured in compulsory courses across all study years. SDM was often integrated into preexisting theories and models and taught through various methods and materials. Generally, teachers and supervisors were not trained in SDM themselves. They assessed students' competence in SDM in a summative manner.

CONCLUSION

Overall, SDM was featured in undergraduate nursing and medical education, however, very implicitly.

Shared decision-making in the Netherlands: Progress is made, but not for all. Time to become inclusive to patients

Dutch initiatives targeting shared decision-making (SDM) are still growing, supported by the government, the Federation of Patients' Organisations, professional bodies and healthcare insurers. The large majority of patients prefers the SDM model. The Dutch are working hard to realise improvement in the application of SDM in daily clinical practice, resulting in glimpses of success with objectified improvement on observed behavior. Nevertheless, the culture shift is still ongoing. Large-scale uptake of SDM behavior is still a challenge. We haven't yet fully reached the patients' needs, given disappointing research data on patients' experiences and professional behavior. In all Dutch implementation projects, early adopters, believers or higher-educated persons have been overrepresented, while patients with limited health literacy have been underrepresented. This is a huge problem as 25% of the Dutch adult population have limited health literacy. To further enhance SDM there are issues to be addressed: We need to make physicians conscious about their limited application of SDM in daily practice, especially regarding preference and decision talk. We need to reward clinicians for the extra work that comes with SDM. We need to be inclusive to patients with limited health literacy, who are less often actually involved in decision-making and at the same time more likely to regret their chosen treatment compared to patients with higher health literacy.