Consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the OMERACT Core Outcome Set for shared decision making interventions in rheumatology trials

OBJECTIVE

To gain consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set for rheumatology trials evaluating shared decision making (SDM) interventions.

METHODS

Following the OMERACT Handbook methods, our Working Group (WG), comprised of 90 members, including 17 patient research partners (PRPs) and 73 clinicians and researchers, had six virtual meetings in addition to email exchanges to develop draft definitions and descriptions. The WG then conducted an international survey of its members to gain consensus on the definitions and descriptions. Finally, the WG members had virtual meetings and e-mail exchanges to review survey results and finalize names, definitions and descriptions of the domains.

RESULTS

WG members contributed to developing the definitions. Fifty-two members representing four continents and 13 countries completed the survey, including 15 PRPs, 33 clinicians and 37 researchers. PRPs and clinicians/researchers agreed with all definitions and descriptions with agreements ranging from 87% to 100%. Respondents suggested wording changes to the names, definitions and descriptions to better reflect the domains. Discussions led to further simplification and clarification to address common questions/concerns about the domains.

CONCLUSION

Our WG reached consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the core domain set for rheumatology trials of SDM interventions. This step is crucial to understand each domain and provides the foundation to identify instruments to measure each domain for inclusion in the Core Outcome Measurement Set.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The current study provides consensus-based definitions and descriptions for the domains of the OMERACT core domain set for shared decision making interventions from patients/caregivers, clinicians and researchers. This is a crucial step to understand each domain and provides the foundation to identify instruments to measure each domain for inclusion in the Core Outcome Measurement Set for trials of SDM interventions.

OMERACT Core outcome measurement set for shared decision making in rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions: a scoping review to identify candidate instruments

OBJECTIVES

Shared decision making (SDM) is a central tenet in rheumatic and musculoskeletal care. The lack of standardization regarding SDM instruments and outcomes in clinical trials threatens the comparative effectiveness of interventions. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) SDM Working Group is developing a Core Outcome Set for trials of SDM interventions in rheumatology and musculoskeletal health. The working group reached consensus on a Core Outcome Domain Set in 2020. The next step is to develop a Core Outcome Measurement Set through the OMERACT Filter 2.2.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) to identify candidate instruments for the OMERACT Filter 2.2 We systematically reviewed five databases (Ovid MEDLINE®, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and Web of Science). An information specialist designed search strategies to identify all measurement instruments used in SDM studies in adults or children living with rheumatic or musculoskeletal diseases or their important others. Paired reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full text articles. We extracted characteristics of all candidate instruments (e.g., measured construct, measurement properties). We classified candidate instruments and summarized evidence gaps with an adapted version of the Summary of Measurement Properties (SOMP) table.

RESULTS

We found 14,464 citations, read 239 full text articles, and included 99 eligible studies. We identified 220 potential candidate instruments. The five most used measurement instruments were the Decisional Conflict Scale (traditional and low literacy versions) (n=38), the Hip/Knee-Decision Quality Instrument (n=20), the Decision Regret Scale (n=9), the Preparation for Decision Making Scale (n=8), and the CollaboRATE (n=8). Only 44 candidate instruments (20%) had any measurement properties reported by the included studies. Of these instruments, only 57% matched with at least one of the 7-criteria adapted SOMP table.

CONCLUSION

We identified 220 candidate instruments used in the SDM literature amongst people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. Our classification of instruments showed evidence gaps and inconsistent reporting of measurement properties. The next steps for the OMERACT SDM Working Group are to match candidate instruments with Core Domains, assess feasibility and review validation studies of measurement instruments in rheumatic diseases or other conditions. Development and validation of new instruments may be required for some Core Domains.

Impact of timing and format of patient decision aids for breast cancer patients on their involvement in and preparedness for decision making - the IMPACTT randomised controlled trial protocol

BACKGROUND

After curative surgery for early-stage breast cancer, patients face a decision on whether to undergo surgery alone or to receive one or more adjuvant treatments, which may lower the risk of recurrence. Variations in survival outcomes are often marginal but there are differences in the side effects and other features of the options that patients may value differently. Hence, the patient's values and preferences are critical in determining what option to choose. It is well-researched that the use of shared decision making and patient decision aids can support this choice in a discussion between patient and clinician. However, it is still to be investigated what impact the timing and format of the patient decision aid have on shared decision making outcomes. In this trial, we aim to investigate the impact of a digital pre-consult compared to a paper-based in-consult patient decision aid on patients' involvement in shared decision making, decisional conflict and preparedness to make a decision.

METHODS

The study is a randomised controlled trial with 204 patients at two Danish oncology outpatient clinics. Eligible patients are newly diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer and offered adjuvant treatments after curative surgery to lower the risk of recurrence. Participants will be randomised to receive either an in-consult paper-based patient decision aid or a pre-consult digital patient decision aid. Data collection includes patient and clinician-reported outcomes as well as observer-reported shared decision making based on audio recordings of the consultation. The primary outcome is the extent to which patients are engaged in a shared decision making process reported by the patient. Secondary aims include the length of consultation, preparation for decision making, preferred role in shared decision making and decisional conflict.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first known randomised, controlled trial comparing a digital, pre-consult patient decision aid to an identical paper-based, in-consult patient decision aid. It will contribute evidence on the impact of patient decision aids in terms of investigating if pre-consult digital patient decisions aids compared to in-consult paper-based decision aids support the cancer patients in being better prepared for decision making.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05573022).

Evaluation of an integrated knowledge translation approach used for updating the Cochrane Review of Patient Decision Aids: a pre-post mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

When people who can use or benefit from research findings are engaged as partners on study teams, the quality and impact of findings are better. These people can include patients/consumers and clinicians who do not identify as researchers. They are referred to as "knowledge users". This partnered approach is called integrated knowledge translation (IKT). We know little about knowledge users' involvement in the conduct of systematic reviews. We aimed to evaluate team members' degree of meaningful engagement and their perceptions of having used an IKT approach when updating the Cochrane Review of Patient Decision Aids.

METHODS

We conducted a pre-post mixed methods study. We surveyed all team members at two time points. Before systematic review conduct, all participating team members indicated their preferred level of involvement within each of the 12 steps of the systematic review process from "Screen titles/abstracts" to "Provide feedback on draft article". After, they reported on their degree of satisfaction with their achieved level of engagement across each step and the degree of meaningful engagement using the Patient Engagement In Research Scale (PEIRS-22) across 7 domains scored from 100 (extremely meaningful engagement) to 0 (no meaningful engagement). We solicited their experiences with the IKT approach using open-ended questions. We analyzed quantitative data descriptively and qualitative data using content analysis. We triangulated data at the level of study design and interpretation.

RESULTS

Of 21 team members, 20 completed the baseline survey (95.2% response rate) and 17/20 (85.0% response rate) the follow-up survey. There were 11 (55%) researchers, 3 (15%) patients/consumers, 5 (25%) clinician-researchers, and 1 (5%) graduate student. At baseline, preferred level of involvement in the 12 systematic review steps varied from n = 3 (15%) (search grey literature sources) to n = 20 (100%) (provide feedback on the systematic review article). At follow-up, 16 (94.1%) participants were totally or very satisfied with the extent to which they were involved in these steps. All (17, 100%) agreed that the process was co-production. Total PEIRS-22 scores revealed most participants reported extremely (13, 76.4%) or very (2, 11.8%) meaningful degree of engagement. Triangulated data revealed that participants indicated benefit to having been engaged in an authentic research process that incorporated diverse perspectives, resulting in better and more relevant outputs. Reported challenges were about time, resources, and the logistics of collaborating with a large group.

CONCLUSION

Following the use of an IKT approach during the conduct of a systematic review, team members reported high levels of meaningful engagement. These results contribute to our understanding of ways to co-produce systematic reviews.

Qualitative experiences, values, and decisional needs of patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism who suffer bleeding-"This pill will keep you alive tonight"

Background

Contemporary guidelines recommend extended-duration anticoagulation among patients with a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE). Little is known about whether this recommendation aligns with patient values after a bleeding complication.

Objectives

To explore the experiences, values, and decisional needs of patients with unprovoked VTE related to extended-duration treatment after an anticoagulant-associated bleed.

Methods

In this descriptive, qualitative study, face to face online semistructured interviews were conducted with patients with unprovoked VTE who had experienced bleeding and continued anticoagulant treatment in one academic hospital in Canada. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis to identify themes. Themes were mapped onto the Ottawa Decisional Support Framework to identify decisional needs.

Results

Between September and December 2021, 14 patients were interviewed (age 41-69 years; 9 females). Many patients were not aware of the option to stop anticoagulation and had limited understanding of the decision about treatment duration. Despite the negative quality-of-life impact of clinically relevant bleeding during VTE treatment, the majority continued anticoagulation due to emotional trauma of VTE diagnosis, a perception that bleeding would be more manageable than VTE recurrence, a desire to maintain a connection to subspecialty care or non-VTE related benefits (eg, cancer diagnosis, protection from COVID-19). Patients' decisional needs included lack of choice awareness, inadequate support for participation, lack of personalized risk stratification, and inadequate information on monitoring and managing heavy menstrual bleeding.

Conclusion

Despite the impact of anticoagulant-associated bleeding on quality of life, patients preferred continuing with anticoagulation for reasons extending beyond secondary VTE prevention. Effective decision-support interventions are needed to address unmet decisional needs.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

BACKGROUND

Patient decision aids are interventions designed to support people making health decisions. At a minimum, patient decision aids make the decision explicit, provide evidence-based information about the options and associated benefits/harms, and help clarify personal values for features of options. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2003 and last updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of patient decision aids in adults considering treatment or screening decisions using an integrated knowledge translation approach.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted the updated search for the period of 2015 (last search date) to March 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EBSCO, and grey literature. The cumulative search covers database origins to March 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published randomized controlled trials comparing patient decision aids to usual care. Usual care was defined as general information, risk assessment, clinical practice guideline summaries for health consumers, placebo intervention (e.g. information on another topic), or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted intervention and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made (informed values-based choice congruence) and the decision-making process, such as knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, feeling informed, clear values, participation in decision-making, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were choice, confidence in decision-making, adherence to the chosen option, preference-linked health outcomes, and impact on the healthcare system (e.g. consultation length). We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of 105 studies that were included in the previous review version compared to those published since that update (n = 104 studies). We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This update added 104 new studies for a total of 209 studies involving 107,698 participants. The patient decision aids focused on 71 different decisions. The most common decisions were about cardiovascular treatments (n = 22 studies), cancer screening (n = 17 studies colorectal, 15 prostate, 12 breast), cancer treatments (e.g. 15 breast, 11 prostate), mental health treatments (n = 10 studies), and joint replacement surgery (n = 9 studies). When assessing risk of bias in the included studies, we rated two items as mostly unclear (selective reporting: 100 studies; blinding of participants/personnel: 161 studies), due to inadequate reporting. Of the 209 included studies, 34 had at least one item rated as high risk of bias. There was moderate-certainty evidence that patient decision aids probably increase the congruence between informed values and care choices compared to usual care (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.13; 21 studies, 9377 participants). Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, there was high-certainty evidence that patient decision aids result in improved participants' knowledge (MD 11.90/100, 95% CI 10.60 to 13.19; 107 studies, 25,492 participants), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.34; 25 studies, 7796 participants), and decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -10.02, 95% CI -12.31 to -7.74; 58 studies, 12,104 participants), indecision about personal values (MD -7.86, 95% CI -9.69 to -6.02; 55 studies, 11,880 participants), and proportion of people who were passive in decision-making (clinician-controlled) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.88; 21 studies, 4348 participants). For adverse outcomes, there was high-certainty evidence that there was no difference in decision regret between the patient decision aid and usual care groups (MD -1.23, 95% CI -3.05 to 0.59; 22 studies, 3707 participants). Of note, there was no difference in the length of consultation when patient decision aids were used in preparation for the consultation (MD -2.97 minutes, 95% CI -7.84 to 1.90; 5 studies, 420 participants). When patient decision aids were used during the consultation with the clinician, the length of consultation was 1.5 minutes longer (MD 1.50 minutes, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.20; 8 studies, 2702 participants). We found the same direction of effect when we compared results for patient decision aid studies reported in the previous update compared to studies conducted since 2015.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care, across a wide variety of decisions, patient decision aids probably helped more adults reach informed values-congruent choices. They led to large increases in knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, and an active role in decision-making. Our updated review also found that patient decision aids increased patients' feeling informed and clear about their personal values. There was no difference in decision regret between people using decision aids versus those receiving usual care. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of patient decision aids on adherence and downstream effects on cost and resource use.

Interventions to facilitate interprofessional collaboration in the operating theatre: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Ineffective collaboration can increase adverse events in the operating theatre. When professionals work collaboratively, they are more likely to improve patient safety and outcomes.

AIM

To identify interprofessional collaboration interventions involving operating theatre teams and describe their effect on facilitating communication, teamwork, and safety.

METHODS

A scoping review of four databases. Results were analysed by identifying interventions and mapping their related outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty studies evaluated single or multi-faceted interventions. Despite low-quality study designs (no randomised controlled trials), four interventions (eg: briefings, checklists, team training, debriefing) improved communication and teamwork, and enhanced safety outcomes. Only one study, using team training, reported that organisational level interventions (eg: Standard Operating Procedures, Lean quality improvement management system) improved teamwork and safety outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Several studies reported interventions enhanced interprofessional collaboration within operating theatre teams. Although findings were in favour of improved communication and teamwork, more rigorous research is required.

Decision coaching for people with kidney failure: A case study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the usefulness of decision coaching for people with kidney failure facing decisions about end-of-life care.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate experiences of people with kidney failure who received decision coaching for end-of-life care decisions.

DESIGN

We conducted a prospective case study bound by time (September to December 2021), location (one nephrology department), and guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with kidney failure facing end-of-life care decisions.

MEASUREMENTS

A nurse trained in decision coaching screened for unmet decisional needs with the SURE test and provided decision coaching using the Ottawa Personal Decision Guide. Postcoaching, the participants were rescreened using the SURE test and interviewed to explore their experience with decision coaching. Change in SURE test findings was analysed descriptively and systematic text condensation was used for the analysis of interviews. Recorded decision coaching sessions underwent content analysis using the Decision Support Analysis Tool.

RESULTS

Decision coaching was provided to four adults with kidney failure. Median pre-SURE test score was 2.5 (range 2-4) and posttest score was 3 (range 3-4), indicating a decrease in decisional needs. Participants described that decision coaching provided an overview of features of options to consider, identified remaining decisional needs for further discussion with relatives and health professionals and clarified next steps. Median Decision Support Analysis Tool score was 9 (range 8-9).

CONCLUSIONS

After decision coaching, results suggest that the participants experienced fewer decisional needs and seemed clearer about the next steps in the decision making process.

Essential content for teaching implementation practice in healthcare: a mixed-methods study of teams offering capacity-building initiatives

BACKGROUND

Applying the knowledge gained through implementation science can support the uptake of research evidence into practice; however, those doing and supporting implementation (implementation practitioners) may face barriers to applying implementation science in their work. One strategy to enhance individuals' and teams' ability to apply implementation science in practice is through training and professional development opportunities (capacity-building initiatives). Although there is an increasing demand for and offerings of implementation practice capacity-building initiatives, there is no universal agreement on what content should be included. In this study we aimed to explore what capacity-building developers and deliverers identify as essential training content for teaching implementation practice.

METHODS

We conducted a convergent mixed-methods study with participants who had developed and/or delivered a capacity-building initiative focused on teaching implementation practice. Participants completed an online questionnaire to provide details on their capacity-building initiatives; took part in an interview or focus group to explore their questionnaire responses in depth; and offered course materials for review. We analyzed a subset of data that focused on the capacity-building initiatives' content and curriculum. We used descriptive statistics for quantitative data and conventional content analysis for qualitative data, with the data sets merged during the analytic phase. We presented frequency counts for each category to highlight commonalities and differences across capacity-building initiatives.

RESULTS

Thirty-three individuals representing 20 capacity-building initiatives participated. Study participants identified several core content areas included in their capacity-building initiatives: (1) taking a process approach to implementation; (2) identifying and applying implementation theories, models, frameworks, and approaches; (3) learning implementation steps and skills; (4) developing relational skills. In addition, study participants described offering applied and pragmatic content (e.g., tools and resources), and tailoring and evolving the capacity-building initiative content to address emerging trends in implementation science. Study participants highlighted some challenges learners face when acquiring and applying implementation practice knowledge and skills.

CONCLUSIONS

This study synthesized what experienced capacity-building initiative developers and deliverers identify as essential content for teaching implementation practice. These findings can inform the development, refinement, and delivery of capacity-building initiatives, as well as future research directions, to enhance the translation of implementation science into practice.

Determinants of practice for providing decision coaching to facilitate informed values-based decision-making: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Decision coaching is a non-directive approach to support patients to prepare for making health decisions. It is used to facilitate patients' involvement in informed values-based decision-making and use of evidence-based health information. A recent systematic review revealed low certainty evidence for its effectiveness with and without evidence-based information. However, there may be opportunities to improve the study and use of decision coaching in clinical practice by systematically investigating its determinants of practice. We aim to conduct a systematic review to identify and synthesise the determinants of practice for providing decision coaching to facilitate patient involvement in decision-making from multiple perspectives that influence its use.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a mixed-methods systematic review guided by the Cochrane' Handbook of Systematic Reviews. We will include studies reporting determinants of practice influencing decision coaching with or without evidence-based patient information with adults making a health decision for themselves or a family member. Systematic literature searches will be conducted in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and PsycINFO via Ovid and CINAHL via EBSCO including quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods study designs. Additionally, experts in the field will be contacted.Two reviewers will independently screen and extract data. We will synthesise determinants using deductive and inductive qualitative content analysis and a coding frame developed specifically for this review based on a taxonomy of barriers and enablers of shared decision-making mapped onto the major domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We will assess the quality of included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required as this systematic review involves only previously published literature. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at scientific conferences and disseminated to relevant consumer groups.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022338299.

Recognizing patient partner contributions to health research: a systematic review of reported practices

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement in research refers to collaboration between researchers and patients (i.e., individuals with lived experience including informal caregivers) in developing or conducting research. Offering non-financial (e.g., co-authorship, gift) or financial (e.g., honoraria, salary) compensation to patient partners can demonstrate appreciation for patient partner time and effort. However, little is known about how patient partners are currently compensated for their engagement in research. We sought to assess the prevalence of reporting patient partner compensation, specific compensation practices (non-financial and financial) reported, and identify benefits, challenges, barriers and enablers to offering financial compensation.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of studies citing the Guidance for Reporting the Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP I and II) reporting checklists (October 2021) within Web of Science and Scopus. Studies that engaged patients as research partners were eligible. Two independent reviewers screened full texts and extracted data from included studies using a standardized data abstraction form. Data pertaining to compensation methods (financial and non-financial) and reported barriers and enablers to financially compensating patient partners were extracted. No formal quality assessment was conducted since the aim of the review is to describe the scope of patient partner compensation. Quantitative data were presented descriptively, and qualitative data were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

The search identified 843 studies of which 316 studies were eligible. Of the 316 studies, 91% (n = 288) reported offering a type of compensation to patient partners. The most common method of non-financial compensation reported was informal acknowledgement on research outputs (65%, n = 206) and co-authorship (49%, n = 156). Seventy-nine studies (25%) reported offering financial compensation (i.e., honoraria, salary), 32 (10%) reported offering no financial compensation, and 205 (65%) studies did not report on financial compensation. Two key barriers were lack of funding to support compensation and absence of institutional policy or guidance. Two frequently reported enablers were considering financial compensation when developing the project budget and adequate project funding.

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of published studies reporting patient engagement in research, most offered non-financial methods of compensation to patient partners. Researchers may need guidance and support to overcome barriers to offering financial compensation.

Exploring appropriateness criteria for informing the total knee arthroplasty decision-making process: An interpretive descriptive study

RATIONAL

The Hawker appropriateness criteria for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are: osteoarthritis symptoms impacting quality of life, evidence of osteoarthritis, trial of conservative treatments, patient's realistic expectations, patient/surgeon agree benefits outweigh risks, and readiness for surgery. Little is known about the barriers and facilitators of using the Hawker et al. appropriateness criteria for TKA in clinical practice.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Explore the barriers and facilitators to using appropriateness criteria for TKA in making decisions for adults with knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

Interpretive descriptive qualitative study at an academic hospital. Purposive sampling aimed to recruit: (1) healthcare team members at all levels influencing care delivery, and (2) adults with TKA assessed at the hospital clinic. Semi-structured interviews asked about the barriers/facilitators to using the Hawker appropriateness criteria. Data analysis consisted of inductive thematic analysis with themes mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains.

RESULTS

Nine healthcare professionals and 14 adults with TKA participated and identified common barriers to using the Hawker appropriateness criteria: (a) intervention characteristics domain: difficulty to assess criteria, patients expecting healthcare professionals to decide, limited accessibility to conservative treatments; (b) individuals characteristics domain: no need to change current TKA process, clinical judgement limited to OA severity/age, implicit assessment of subjective criteria; (c) inner setting domain: TKA information received after decision made; and (d) outer setting domain: no timely access to TKA. A facilitator of use was evidence/buy-in fosters programme changes.

CONCLUSION

Barriers to using the criteria relevant to clinical practice and the healthcare system were identified while only one facilitator was revealed. Interventions tailored to these barriers are needed to support the use of the Hawker appropriateness criteria in TKA decision-making.

Appraising publicly available online resources to support patients considering decisions about medical assistance in dying in Canada: an environmental scan

BACKGROUND

Medical assistance in dying (MAiD) was legalized in Canada in 2016, with legislation updated in 2021. It is unclear whether resources are available to help patients make this difficult decision; therefore, we sought to identify and quality appraise Canadian MAiD resources for supporting patients making this decision.

METHODS

We conducted an environmental scan by searching Canadian websites for online MAiD resources that were published after the 2016 MAiD legislation, patient targeted, publicly accessible and able to inform decisions about MAiD in Canada. We excluded resources that targeted health care professionals or policy-makers, service protocols and personal narratives. Two authors appraised resources using the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) criteria and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for health literacy. Descriptive analysis was conducted. We defined resources as patient decision aids if 7 IPDAS defining criteria were met, and we rated resources as adequate for understandability or actionability if the PEMAT score was 70% or greater.

RESULTS

We identified 80 MAiD resources. As of March 2023, 62 resources (90%) provided eligibility according to the 2021 legislation and 11 did not discuss any eligibility criteria. The median IPDAS score was 3 out of 7; 52% discussed alternative options and none provided benefits or harms. Of 80 resources, 59% were adequate for understandability and 29% were adequate for actionability.

INTERPRETATION

Although many resources on MAiD were updated with 2021 legislation, few were adequate to support patients with lower health literacy. There is a need to determine whether a patient decision aid would be appropriate for people in Canada considering MAiD.

A blended learning for general practitioners and nurses on skills to support shared decision-making with patients about palliative cancer treatment: A one-group pre-posttest study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a newly developed blended learning programme for general practitioners (GPs) and nurses in supporting shared decision making (SDM) about palliative cancer treatment in a simulated setting.

METHODS

In a pre-posttest study, healthcare professionals (HCPs) participated in the blended learning (i.e. e-learning and (online) training session). HCPs filled out surveys (T0 (baseline), T1 (after e-learning) and T2 (after full blended learning)) and engaged in simulated consultations at T0 and T2. The primary outcome was observed SDM support (Triple-S; DSAT-10 for validation). Secondary outcomes included satisfaction, knowledge about and attitude towards SDM support. Repeated measures General Linear Models were conducted.

RESULTS

33 HCPs (17 GPs and 16 nurses) participated. SDM support significantly improved after training (Triple-S; medium effect). Observers' overall rating of SDM support (medium effect) as well as HCPs' knowledge (large effect) and beliefs about their capabilities (medium effect) improved after training. There was no difference in decision support skills (DSAT-10), HCPs' other clinical behavioural intentions and satisfaction. HCPs evaluated the training positively.

CONCLUSION

Blended learning for HCPs on supporting SDM in palliative cancer care improved their skills, knowledge and confidence in simulated consultations.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

These first findings are promising for evaluating interprofessional SDM in clinical practice.

Cultural adaptation of the Pan-Canadian Oncology Symptom triage and remote support practice guide for cancer-related fatigue in China: Integration of traditional Chinese medicine nursing evidence

Objective

This study aimed at culturally adapting pan-Canadian Oncology Symptom Triage and Remote Support (COSTaRS) Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) Practice Guide to enable its use in China. This article focuses on presenting the key cultural adaptation step: supplementing traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) nursing recommendations for CRF symptom management according to evidence.

Methods

Guided by A Guideline Adaptation and Implementation Planning Resource (CAN-IMPLEMENT), the process for cultural adaptation of the CRF guide in the COSTaRS project included translation, expert committee review, acceptability and feasibility assessment, and targeted adaptation to include TCM nursing techniques for CRF management via the Delphi method.

Results

First, an expert committee of nurses, nurse leaders, and researchers was established. The practice guide was translated and verified by the members of the expert committee. Nurses then rated the practice guide for acceptability and feasibility. Concurrently, 83 stakeholders (nurses and patients) identified five relevant TCM nursing techniques: acupuncture, moxibustion, acupressure therapy, Taijiquan, and auricular acupoint embedding. A systematic review of literature identified three clinical practice guidelines and four systematic reviews. Through two rounds of Delphi expert consultation, five TCM care strategies were added into the culturally adapted COSTaRS practice guide.

Conclusions

Cultural adaptation of the Canadian CRF practice guide involved not only language translation but also the addition of relevant TCM evidence. Combining TCM evidence and the Delphi method was a novel aspect of the cultural adaptation process. Further research is needed to investigate the implementation of the guide in appropriate settings in China.

Quality of patient decision aids to support the public making COVID-19 decisions: An online environmental scan

OBJECTIVE

To identify and appraise the quality of COVID-19 patient decision aids (PtDAs).

METHODS

We conducted an environmental scan of online publicly available COVID-19 PtDAs. Two reviewers independently searched and extracted data. We calculated median International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) scores and proportion scoring > 70% on Patient Education Materials Information Tool (PEMAT) adequate for understandability and actionability.

RESULTS

Of 876 resources identified, 12 were PtDAs. Decisions focused on initial COVID-19 vaccination series (n = 9), location of care for elderly (n = 2), and social distancing (n = 1). All 12 PtDAs were written materials and two had accompanying videos. The median IPDAS score minimizing risk of biased decisions was 4 of 6 items (IQR 1, range 2-4). For PEMAT, 92% had adequate for understandability and none for actionability.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified few online publicly available COVID-19 PtDAs and none were about COVID-19 vaccination boosters or treatment. PtDAs scored poorly on actionability and none met all IPDAS criteria for minimizing risk of biased decisions.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

PtDA developers for COVID-19 and future pandemics should ensure their PtDAs meet all IPDAS criteria for minimizing risk of bias, have adequate scores for actionability, and are disseminated in the A to Z inventory.

Impact of an online, individualised, patient reported outcome measures based patient decision aid on patient expectations, decisional regret, satisfaction, and health-related quality-of-life for patients considering total knee arthroplasty: Results from a randomised controlled trial

RATIONALE

Total knee arthroplasty is a common surgical procedure but not appropriate for all patients with knee osteoarthritis. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) can promote shared decision making and enhance understanding and expectations of procedures among patients, resulting in better discussions between patients and healthcare providers about whether total knee arthroplasty is the most appropriate option.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Evaluate impact of an individualised PtDA for osteoarthritis patients considering total knee arthroplasty 1 year after baseline assessment.

METHODS

Prospective, randomised controlled trial comparing an intervention arm (IA) and routine care arm (RCA). The IA included an online individualised patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) based PtDA and one-page summary report for the surgeon. We report secondary outcomes from the final assessment: patient expectations, decisional regret, patient satisfaction with outcomes of knee replacement, health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) and depression. We report changes in HRQOL between baseline and final assessments, study arms, and surgical versus non-surgical patients. Descriptive statistics were used to describe participant characteristics and continuous variables. Dichotomous outcomes (expectations, decisional regret, satisfaction) were analyzed using logistic regression and continuous outcomes (HRQOL, depression) were modelled using linear regression.

RESULTS

Overall, 140 participants completed all study assessments (IA: n = 69, RCA: n = 71); n = 108 underwent surgery (IA: n = 49, RCA: n = 59). Regardless of study arm, most participants reported expectations were met, minimal decisional regret, satisfaction with outcomes of knee replacement, and had improvements in HRQOL. While no significant differences in study outcomes were found between study arms, IA results were in the direction hypothesised in favour of the PtDA.

CONCLUSIONS

Although we were not able to detect statistically significant benefits associated with implementing this PROMs-based PtDA, there was no apparent negative effect on these outcomes 1 year after baseline. We anticipate there may be benefit to implementing this PtDA earlier in the osteoarthritis care pathway where patients have more opportunities to manage their disease non-surgically.

Hip and Knee Total Joint Arthroplasty Online Resources for Patients and Health Care Professionals: A Canadian Environmental Scan

Purpose:

To appraise the quality of publicly available online Canadian resources for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis considering total joint arthroplasty (TJA) and health care professionals participating in TJA decision-making processes.

Method:

An environmental scan. Two independent authors appraised: a) patient resources against the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) criteria and the Patient Education Material Evaluation Tool (PEMAT); and b) health care professional resources against six appropriateness criteria for TJA and eight elements of shared decision-making. Analysis was descriptive.

Results:

Of 84 included resources, 71 were for patients, 11 for health care professionals, and 2 for both. For patient resources, the median number of IPDAS defining criteria met was 2 of 7, median PEMAT understandability score was 83%, and median PEMAT actionability score was 60%. For health care professional resources, the median number of appropriateness criteria was 3 of 6, and the median number of shared decision-making elements was 3 of 8.

Conclusions:

Only four of 73 patient resources were structured to help patients consider their options and reach a decision based on their preferences. Health care professional resources were limited to traditional criteria for determining TJA appropriateness (evidence of osteoarthritis, use of conservative treatments) and poorly met key elements of shared decision-making.

Decisions and Decisional Needs of Canadians From all Provinces and Territories During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Population-Based Cross-sectional Surveys

BACKGROUND

Never before COVID-19 had Canadians faced making health-related decisions in a context of significant uncertainty. However, little is known about which type of decisions and the types of difficulties that they faced.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify the health-related decisions and decisional needs of Canadians.

METHODS

Our study was codesigned by researchers and knowledge users (eg, patients, clinicians). Informed by the CHERRIES (the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys) reporting guideline, we conducted 2 online surveys of random samples drawn from the Leger consumer panel of 400,000 Canadians. Eligible participants were adults (≥18 years) who received or were receiving any health services in the past 12 months for themselves (adults) or for their child (parent) or senior with cognitive impairment (caregiver). We assessed decisions and decisional needs using questions informed by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, including decisional conflict and decision regret using the Decision Conflict Scale (DCS) and the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), respectively. Descriptive statistics were conducted for adults who had decided for themselves or on behalf of someone else. Significant decisional conflict (SDC) was defined as a total DCS score of >37.5 out of 100, and significant decision regret was defined as a total DRS score of >25 out of 100.

RESULTS

From May 18 to June 4, 2021, 14,459 adults and 6542 parents/caregivers were invited to participate. The invitation view rate was 15.5% (2236/14,459) and 28.3% (1850/6542); participation rate, 69.3% (1549/2236) and 28.7% (531/1850); and completion rate, 97.3% (1507/1549) and 95.1% (505/531), respectively. The survey was completed by 1454 (97.3%) adults and 438 (95.1%) parents/caregivers in English (1598/1892, 84.5%) or French (294/1892, 15.5%). Respondents from all 10 Canadian provinces and the northern territories represented a range of ages, education levels, civil statuses, ethnicities, and annual household income. Of 1892 respondents, 541 (28.6%) self-identified as members of marginalized groups. The most frequent decisions were (adults vs parents/caregivers) as follows: COVID-19 vaccination (490/1454, 33.7%, vs 87/438, 19.9%), managing a health condition (253/1454, 17.4%, vs 47/438, 10.7%), other COVID-19 decisions (158/1454, 10.9%, vs 85/438, 19.4%), mental health care (128/1454, 8.8%, vs 27/438, 6.2%), and medication treatments (115/1454, 7.9%, vs 23/438, 5.3%). Caregivers also reported decisions about moving family members to/from nursing or retirement homes (48/438, 11.0%). Adults (323/1454, 22.2%) and parents/caregivers (95/438, 21.7%) had SDC. Factors making decisions difficult were worrying about choosing the wrong option (557/1454, 38.3%, vs 184/438, 42.0%), worrying about getting COVID-19 (506/1454, 34.8%, vs 173/438, 39.5%), public health restrictions (427/1454, 29.4%, vs 158/438, 36.1%), information overload (300/1454, 20.6%, vs 77/438, 17.6%), difficulty separating misinformation from scientific evidence (297/1454, 20.4%, vs 77/438, 17.6%), and difficulty discussing decisions with clinicians (224/1454, 15.4%, vs 51/438, 11.6%). For 1318 (90.6%) adults and 366 (83.6%) parents/caregivers who had decided, 353 (26.8%) and 125 (34.2%) had significant decision regret, respectively. In addition, 1028 (50%) respondents made their decision alone without considering the opinions of clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

During COVID-19, Canadians who responded to the survey faced several new health-related decisions. Many reported unmet decision-making needs, resulting in SDC and decision regret. Interventions can be designed to address their decisional needs and support patients facing new health-related decisions.

Instruments to assess appropriateness of hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess criteria and psychometric properties of instruments for assessing appropriateness of elective joint arthroplasty (JA) for adults with primary hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

A systematic review guided by Cochrane methods and PRISMA guidelines. Studies were searched in five databases. Eligible articles include all study designs developing, testing, and/or using an instrument to assess JA appropriateness. Two independent reviewers screened and extracted data. Instruments were compared with Hawker et al. JA consensus criteria. Psychometric properties of instruments were described and appraised guided by Fitzpatrick's and COSMIN approaches.

RESULTS

Of 55 instruments included, none met all Hawker et al. JA consensus criteria. Criteria the most met were pain (n = 50), function (n = 49), quality of life (n = 33), and radiography (n = 24). Criteria the least met were clinical evidence of OA (n = 18), expectations (n = 15), readiness for surgery (n = 11), conservative treatments (n = 8), and patient/surgeon agree benefits outweigh risks (n = 0). Instrument by Arden et al. met the most criteria (6 of 9). The most tested psychometric properties were appropriateness (n = 55), face/content validity (n = 55), predictive validity (n = 29), construct validity and feasibility (n = 24). The least tested psychometric properties were intra-rater reliability (n = 3), internal consistency (n = 5), and inter-rater reliability (n = 13). Instruments by Gutacker et al. and Osborne et al. met the most psychometric properties (4 of 10).

CONCLUSION

Most instruments included traditional criteria for assessing JA appropriateness but did not include a trial of conservative treatments or shared decision-making elements. There was limited evidence on psychometric properties.

Decisional Support Needed when Facing Tough Decisions: Survey of Parents with Children having Differences of Sex Development

Introduction

Parents of infants and young children newly diagnosed with differences of sex development (DSD) commonly face medical and psychosocial management decisions at a time when they are first learning about the condition and cannot consult their child for input. The aim of this study was to identify areas of greatest need for parental decisional support.

Methods

34 parents of children receiving care for DSD at one of three US children's hospitals participated in a survey to learn what clinical and psychosocial decisions needed to be made on behalf of their child. Parents were then asked to identify and focus on a "tough" decision and respond to questions assessing factors affecting decision-making, decision-making preferences, decisional conflict, and decision regret. Descriptive analyses were conducted.

Results

Decisions about surgery and aspects of sharing information about their child's condition with others were the two most frequently reported decisions overall, experienced by 97% and 88% of parents, as well as most frequently nominated as tough decisions. Many parents reported mild to moderate levels of decisional conflict (59%) and decision regret (74%). Almost all parents (94%) reported experiencing at least one factor as interfering with decision-making (e.g., "worried too much about choosing the 'wrong' option"). Parents universally reported a desire to be involved in decision-making - preferably making the final decision primarily on their own (79%), or together with their child's healthcare providers (21%). The majority of parents judged healthcare providers (82%) and patient/family organizations (58%) as trustworthy sources of information.

Discussion

Parents of children with DSD encounter medical, surgical, and psychosocial management decisions. Despite difficulties including emotional distress and informational concerns (including gaps and overload), parents express strong desires to play key roles in decision-making on behalf of their children. Healthcare providers can help identify family-specific needs through observation and inquiry in the clinical context. Together with families, providers should focus on specific clinical management decisions and support parental involvement in making decisions on behalf of young children with DSD.

A survey of healthcare professionals' perceptions of the decisional needs of parents with an infant born with a disorder/difference of sex development

INTRODUCTION

Parents of infants born with differences in sex development (DSD) face many difficult decisions. As part of a larger project designed to develop educational interventions to promote shared decision making, this study assessed healthcare professionals' (HCPs) perceptions of parental decision-making needs when an infant is born with a DSD.

METHODS

A cross-sectional web-based survey following the Ottawa Decision Support Framework was conducted in two waves, between October 2020 and June 2022. Survey domains included: common DSD decisions, indicators of parents' decisional needs, and resources and approaches to support parental decision making. Eligible participants were HCPs working within interprofessional pediatric DSD centers in the USA. Up to three reminders were sent. Descriptive analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

71 HCPs participated; most (>90%) reported parents experience signs of decisional conflict including feeling unsure, worrying about what could go wrong, and fear of choosing a "wrong," irreversible option. The majority (90%) reported parents experience strong emotions interfering with their receptivity to information or deliberation. The majority (>70%) identified inadequate parental knowledge of the DSD as a barrier to decision making, coupled with information overload (>90%). HCPs rated several factors as "very" important, including: parents having information on benefits, harms, and other features of options (93%), having information about all the available options (87%), and having access to providers to discuss the options (84%). Providers endorsed using a variety of approaches to support parents' decision making; however, access to decision aids was not universally rated as highly important (very, 44%; somewhat, 46%; a little, 10%).

IMPLICATIONS

Overall, HCPs expressed favorable attitudes toward supporting active parental participation in medical decision making. Opportunities for enhanced support of shared decision making included: a) recognizing and addressing parental emotional distress and informational overload at a time when parents need to consider complex options for their infant or young child; and b) the need for HCPs to encourage values clarification in decision-making encounters with parents.

Co-creating a suite of patient decision aids for parents of an infant or young child with differences of sex development: A methods roadmap

Introduction

Parents and guardians of infants and young children with differences of sex development (DSD) often face numerous health and social decisions about their child's condition. While proxy health decisions can be stressful in any circumstance, they are further exacerbated in this clinical context by significant variations in clinical presentation, parental lack of knowledge about DSD, irreversibility of some options (e.g., gonadectomy), a paucity of research available about long-term outcomes, and anticipated decisional regret. This study aimed to engage clinicians, parents, and an adult living with DSD to collaboratively develop a suite of patient decision aids (PDAs) to respond to the decisional needs of parents and guardians of infants and young children diagnosed with DSD.

Methods

We used a systematic co-development process guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework and the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS). The five steps were: literature selection, establish the team, decisional needs assessment, create the PDAs, and alpha testing.

Results

We developed four PDAs to support parents/guardians of infants or young children diagnosed with DSD about four priority decisions identified through our decisional needs assessment: genetic testing, gender of rearing, genital surgery and gonadal surgery. All four PDAs include information for parents about DSD, the options, reasons to choose or avoid each option, and opportunities for parents/guardians to rate the importance of features of each option to clarify their values for these features. Qualitative feedback was positive from clinicians, parents and an adult living with DSD.

Conclusions

These PDAs are clinical tools designed to support parents/guardians and to promote making an informed and shared DSD-related decision. While these tools are specific to DSD, they contain themes and elements translatable to other pediatric populations.

Prise en charge des symptômes du cancer : Évaluation du tutoriel en ligne du Groupe de recherche pancanadien sur le triage des symptômes et l’aide à distance en oncologie

Objectif

Évaluer l’acceptabilité du tutoriel Web en libre accès du Groupe pancanadien sur le triage des symptômes et l’aide à distance en oncologie (COSTaRS), de même que ses effets sur les connaissances des infirmières et sur leur confiance perçue à prendre en charge les symptômes du cancer.

Méthodologie

Évaluation rétrospective pré-test/post-test réalisée auprès d’infirmières ayant fait l’examen de connaissances du tutoriel ou rempli le sondage sur l’acceptabilité. Le tutoriel a été modelé sur un atelier en personne (déjà évalué) dont le but était de préparer les infirmières offrant des soins de prise en charge des symptômes du cancer à utiliser les guides de pratique COSTaRS.

Résultats

De 2017 à 2021, 743 infirmières ont fait l’examen de connaissances et 749 ont évalué le tutoriel. Le résultat moyen à l’examen était de 4,4/6, et 83 % des participantes ont obtenu la note de passage. Après le tutoriel, les infirmières avaient gagné en confiance pour évaluer et trier les patients, et pour les guider dans leurs autosoins (p < 0,001); leur habileté à utiliser les guides COSTaRS s’était aussi améliorée (p < 0,001). Selon les infirmières, le tutoriel était facile à comprendre (95 %), fournissait juste la bonne quantité d’information (92 %), donnait de l’information nouvelle (75 %), était bon à excellent dans l’ensemble (89 %), et valais la peine d’être recommandé à d’autres infirmières (83 %).

Conclusion

Plus de 700 infirmières ont accédé au tutoriel. Après l’avoir complété, elles avaient acquis de bonnes connaissances et amélioré leur confiance à prendre en charge les symptômes du cancer.

Evaluation of an educational program for nurses providing cancer symptom management: The pan-Canadian Oncology Symptom Triage and Remote Support Online Tutorial

Purpose

To evaluate the acceptability of the pan-Canadian Oncology Symptom Triage and Remote Support (COSTaRS) open-access online tutorial and its impact on nurses' knowledge and perceived confidence in symptom management.

Methods

Retrospective pre-/post-test evaluation of nurses who completed the tutorial knowledge test and/or acceptability survey. The tutorial was modeled after the previously evaluated in-person workshop to prepare nurses providing cancer symptom management using COSTaRS practice guides.

Results

From 2017-2021, 743 nurses completed the knowledge test, and 749 nurses evaluated the tutorial. Mean knowledge score was 4.4/6 and 83% of participants achieved passing scores. Compared to pre-tutorial, nurses improved their perceived confidence in assessing, triaging, guiding patients in self-care (p<0.001), and ability to use the COSTaRS guides (p<0.001). Nurses rated the tutorial as easy to understand (95%), just the right amount of information (92%), providing new information (75%), overall good to excellent (89%), and would recommend it to others (83%).

Conclusions

More than 700 nurses accessed the tutorial. After completion, nurses demonstrated good knowledge and improved perceived confidence in cancer symptom management.

Changes in mammography screening in Ontario and Alberta following national guideline dissemination: an interrupted time series analysis

Background: In November 2011, the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care released guidelines for screening women at average breast cancer risk. Weak recommendations (framed using GRADE methodology) were made for screening women aged 50 to 74 years every two to three years, and for not screening women aged 40 to 49 years. Methods: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis using administrative data to examine bilateral mammography use before and after a release of a national breast screening guideline. Women aged 40 to 74 years living in Ontario or Alberta from 30th November 2008 to 30th November 2014 were included. Strata included age, region of residence, neighbourhood income quintile, immigration status, and education level. Results: In both provinces, mammography use rates were lower in the post-intervention period (527 vs. 556 and 428 vs. 465/1000 women in Ontario and Alberta, respectively). In Ontario, mammography trends decreased following guideline release to align with recommendations for women aged 40 to 74 (decrease of 2.21/1000 women, SE 0.26/1000, p<0.0001). In Alberta, mammography trends decreased for women aged 40 to 49 years (3/1000 women, SE 0.32, p<0.001) and 50 to 69 (2.9/1000 women, SE 0.79, p<0.001), but did not change for women aged 70 to 74 (0.7/1000 women, SE 1.23, p=0.553). In both provinces, trends in mammography use rates were sustained for up to three years after guideline release. Conclusions: We observed a decrease in screening for women aged 40-49. Additional research to explore whether shared decision making was used to optimize guideline-concordant screening for women aged 50-74 is needed.

Ensuring High-Quality Shared Decision-making for Lung Cancer Screening

This Viewpoint discusses the role of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration in emphasizing the importance of shared decision-making facilitated by trained individuals and the use of decision aids that meet minimal quality standards when counseling patients for lung cancer screening.

Extended‐duration thromboprophylaxis for abdominopelvic surgery: Development and evaluation of a risk‐stratified patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision making

Background

Extended-duration thromboprophylaxis is used to decrease risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after surgery but may increase the risk of bleeding. The decision to complete a course of extended-duration thromboprophylaxis can be challenging.

Objective

The objective of this study was to develop an acceptable patient decision aid (PtDA) to facilitate shared decision making for the use of extended-duration thromboprophylaxis following major abdominal surgery.

Methods

An evidence-based, risk-stratified PtDA was created. The evidence on benefits and harms of a 28-day postoperative course of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) versus in-hospital prophylaxis only were synthesized. Outcomes included minor bleeding, major bleeding, clinically significant VTE, and fatal VTE. Risks were calculated and reported by Caprini score. Alpha testing of the PtDA draft with various stakeholders was performed using a 10-question survey to assess acceptability of the PtDA with patients, thrombosis experts, and surgeons. The primary outcome was the acceptability of the PtDA.

Results

Acceptability testing was performed with 11 patients, 11 thrombosis experts, and 11 surgeons. Most responders felt the language on the PtDA was easy to follow (28/33, 85%), and that the information was well balanced between management options (9/11 [82%] patients; 17/21 [80%] clinicians). Most patients (9/11, 82%) and clinicians (18/22, 82%) believed it would be a useful clinical tool, and were satisfied with the overall quality of the PtDA (27/33, 82%).

Conclusions

A risk-stratified, evidence-based PtDA was created to facilitate shared decision making for the use of extended-duration LMWH following major abdominal surgery. This clinical tool was acceptable with patients and physicians and is available at https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/decaids.html.

Decision-making in the management of obesity: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review will evaluate the current published literature on decision-making in obesity management.

INTRODUCTION

Obesity is increasing in incidence worldwide. Although indications have been established for a variety of available treatment modalities, treatment selection must also factor in patient preferences, clinician expertise, and resource availability. Such considerations are crucial given the exponential expansion of new surgical techniques and pharmacologic options in the last decade. Although literature exists for decision-making on various obesity management topics, there are no scoping reviews systematically mapping the literature. This scoping review is timely given that the treatment of obesity has evolved into a multidisciplinary endeavor with myriad management decisions that both patients and clinicians must navigate.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

The review will consider for inclusion full-text primary studies, published in English from the year 2000 onwards, pertaining to decision-making in obesity management for health care providers involved in obesity management for patients aged ≥18 years.

METHODS

This scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Embase (Elsevier), MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus (Elsevier), Web of Science (Clarivate), CINAHL Complete (EBSCO), PsycINFO (EBSCO), and Cochrane Central (Wiley) will be systematically searched using a predefined strategy. Two independent reviewers will conduct a 3-tiered screen of identified articles, with a third reviewer resolving disputes. Data extraction will be performed using a predefined, yet flexible form. Descriptive summaries and mapping will be provided for included studies. Available evidence and knowledge gaps will be identified and summarized as they relate to specific concepts, populations, and contexts in obesity management decision-making.

Understanding how and under what circumstances decision coaching works for people making healthcare decisions: a realist review

Background

Decision coaching is non-directive support delivered by a trained healthcare provider to help people prepare to actively participate in making healthcare decisions. This study aimed to understand how and under what circumstances decision coaching works for people making healthcare decisions.

Methods

We followed the realist review methodology for this study. This study was built on a Cochrane systematic review of the effectiveness of decision coaching interventions for people facing healthcare decisions. It involved six iterative steps: (1) develop the initial program theory; (2) search for evidence; (3) select, appraise, and prioritize studies; (4) extract and organize data; (5) synthesize evidence; and (6) consult stakeholders and draw conclusions.

Results

We developed an initial program theory based on decision coaching theories and stakeholder feedback. Of the 2594 citations screened, we prioritized 27 papers for synthesis based on their relevance rating. To refine the program theory, we identified 12 context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations. Essential mechanisms for decision coaching to be initiated include decision coaches’, patients’, and clinicians’ commitments to patients’ involvement in decision making and decision coaches’ knowledge and skills (four CMOs). CMOs during decision coaching are related to the patient (i.e., willing to confide, perceiving their decisional needs are recognized, acquiring knowledge, feeling supported), and the patient-decision coach interaction (i.e., exchanging information, sharing a common understanding of patient’s values) (five CMOs). After decision coaching, the patient’s progress in making or implementing a values-based preferred decision can be facilitated by the decision coach’s advocacy for the patient, and the patient’s deliberation upon options (two CMOs). Leadership support enables decision coaches to have access to essential resources to fulfill their role (one CMOs).

Discussion

In the refined program theory, decision coaching works when there is strong leadership support and commitment from decision coaches, clinicians, and patients. Decision coaches need to be capable in coaching, encourage patients’ participation, build a trusting relationship with patients, and act as a liaison between patients and clinicians to facilitate patients’ progress in making or implementing an informed values-based preferred option. More empirical studies, especially qualitative and process evaluation studies, are needed to further refine the program theory.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-022-02007-0.

What is the Best Evidence to Guide Management of Acute Achilles Tendon Ruptures? A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Category:

Sports; Trauma

Introduction/Purpose:

Uncertainty exists regarding the best treatment for acute Achilles tendon ruptures. Simultaneous comparison of the multiple treatment options using traditional study designs is problematic; multiarm clinical trials often are logistically constrained to small sample sizes, and traditional meta-analyses are limited to comparisons of only two treatments that have been compared in head-to-head trials. Network meta-analyses allow for simultaneous comparison of all existing treatments utilizing both direct and indirect evidence. We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to answer the following questions: Considering open repair, minimally invasive surgery repair, functional rehabilitation, or primary immobilization for acute Achilles tendon ruptures, (1) which intervention is associated with the lowest risk of rerupture? (2) Which intervention is associated with the lowest risk of complications resulting in surgery?

Methods:

Five databases and grey literature sources were searched from inception to September 30, 2019. Included studies were RCTs comparing treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures using two or more of the following interventions: primary immobilization, functional rehabilitation, open surgical repair, or MIS repair. We excluded studies enrolling patients with chronic ruptures, reruptures, and preexisting Achilles tendinopathy as well as studies with more than 20% loss to follow-up or less than 6 months of follow-up. Nineteen RCTs (1316 patients) were included in the final analysis. The mean number of patients per study treatment arm was 35 +- 16, mean age was 41 +- 5 years, mean sex composition was 80% +- 10% males, and mean follow-up was 22 +- 12 months. The four treatment groups were compared for the main outcomes of rerupture and complications resulting in operation. The analysis was conducted using random-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis with vague priors.

Results:

Treatment with primary immobilization had a greater risk of rerupture than open surgery (odds ratio 4.06 [95% credible interval {CrI} 1.47 to 11.88]; p < 0.05). There were no other differences between treatments for risk of rerupture. Minimally invasive surgery was ranked first for fewest complications resulting in surgery and was associated with a lower risk of complications resulting in surgery than functional rehabilitation (OR 0.16 [95% CrI 0.02 to 0.90]; p < 0.05), open surgery (OR 0.22 [95% CrI 0.04 to 0.93]; p < 0.05), and primary immobilization (OR < 0.01 [95% CrI < 0.01 to 0.01]; p < 0.05). Risk of complications resulting in surgery was no different between primary immobilization and open surgery (OR 1.46 [95% CrI 0.35 to 5.36]). Data for patient-reported outcome scores and return to activity were inappropriate for pooling secondary to considerable clinical heterogeneity and imprecision associated with small sample sizes.

Conclusion:

Faced with acute Achilles tendon rupture, patients should be counseled that the risk of rerupture likely is no different across contemporary treatments. Considering the possibly lower risk of complications resulting in surgery associated with MIS repair, patients and surgeons must balance any benefit with the potential risks of MIS techniques. As treatments continue to evolve, consistent reporting of validated patient-reported outcome measures is critically important to facilitate analysis with existing RCT evidence. Infrequent but serious complications such as rerupture and deep infection should be further explored to determine whether meaningful differences exist in specific patient populations.

Interprofessional Collaboration in the OR: A Qualitative Study of Nurses' Perspectives

Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) in the OR enhances safe and effective patient care. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore perioperative nurses' perspectives on their contributions to IPC. We conducted a secondary analysis of 19 semistructured interviews with perioperative RNs and completed inductive thematic analysis with subsequent categorization of the themes into the Interprofessional Education for Collaborative Patient-Centred Practice Framework. Nurses expressed the importance of being heard through effective communication, feeling confident in their role, being aware of interdependent roles, and sharing a common understanding. From nurses' perspectives, use of structured processes enabled organization of interdisciplinary patient care. Nurses showed leadership skills when they anticipated the needs of the team and recognized they needed support to develop these skills. They contributed to IPC through their shared understanding of common goals, leadership skills in the OR, and active involvement in delivering structured processes.

What can we learn from rapidly developed patient decision aids produced during the covid-19 pandemic?

Supporting people to make decisions during the covid-19 pandemic created new opportunities for shared decision making and rapid development of patient decision aids, say Michael Barry and colleagues

Decision aids for home and community care: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Decision aids (DAs) for clients in home and community care can support shared decision-making (SDM) with patients, healthcare teams and informal caregivers. We aimed to identify DAs developed for home and community care, verify their adherence to international DA criteria and explore the involvement of interprofessional teams in their development and use.

DESIGN

Systematic review reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

Six electronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library) from inception to November 2019, social media and grey literature websites up to January 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

DAs designed for home and community care settings or including home care or community services as options.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently reviewed citations. Analysis consisted of a narrative synthesis of outcomes and a thematic analysis. DAs were appraised using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS). We collected information on the involvement of interprofessional teams, including nurses, in their development and use.

RESULTS

After reviewing 10 337 database citations and 924 grey literature citations, we extracted characteristics of 33 included DAs. DAs addressed a variety of decision points. Nearly half (42%) were relevant to older adults. Several DAs did not meet IPDAS criteria. Involvement of nurses and interprofessional teams in the development and use of DAs was minimal (33.3% of DAs).

CONCLUSION

DAs concerned a variety of decisions, especially those related to older people. This reflects the complexity of decisions and need for better support in this sector. There is little evidence about the involvement of interprofessional teams in the development and use of DAs in home and community care settings. An interprofessional approach to designing DAs for home care could facilitate SDM with people being cared for by teams.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020169450.

Difficult Decisions for Older Canadians Receiving Home Care, and Why They Are So Difficult: A Web-Based Decisional Needs Assessment

Background. Older adults receiving home care services often face decisions related to aging, illness, and loss of autonomy. To inform tailored shared decision making interventions, we assessed their decisional needs by asking about the most common difficult decisions, measured associated decisional conflict, and identified factors associated with it. Methods. In March 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional survey with a pan-Canadian Web-based panel of older adults (≥65 y) receiving home care services. For a difficult decision they had faced in the past year, we evaluated clinically significant decisional conflict (CSDC) using the 16-item Decisional Conflict Scale (score 0–100) with a >37.5 cutoff. To identify factors associated with CSDC, we performed descriptive, bivariable, and multivariable analyses using the stepwise selection method with an assumed entry and exit significance level of 0.15 and 0.20, respectively. Final model selection was based on the Bayesian information criterion. Results. Among 460 participants with an average age of 72.5 y, difficult decisions were, in order of frequency, about housing and safety (57.2%), managing health conditions (21.8%), and end-of-life care (8.3%). CSDC was experienced by 14.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.5%, 18.1%) of respondents on all decision points. Factors associated with CSDC included household size = 1 (OR [95% CI]: 1.81 [0.99, 3.33]; P = 0.27), household size = 3 (2.66 [0.78, 8.98]; P = 0.83), and household size = 4 (6.91 [2.23, 21.39]; P = 0.014); preferred option not matching the decision made (4.05 [2.05, 7.97]; P < 0.001); passive role in decision making (5.13 [1.78, 14.77]; P = 0.002); and lower quality of life (0.70 [0.57, 0.87]; P<0.001). Discussion. Some older adults receiving home care services in Canada experience CSDC when facing difficult decisions. Shared decision-making interventions could mitigate associated factors.

Ready for SDM- evaluation of an interprofessional training module in shared decision making - A cluster randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

Ready for SDM was developed in Norway as a comprehensive modularized curriculum for health care providers (HCP). The current study evaluated the efficacy of one of the modules, a 2-hour interprofessional SDM training designed to enhance SDM competencies.

METHODS

A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted with eight District Psychiatric Centres randomized to wait-list control (CG) or intervention group (IG). Participants and trainers were not blinded to their allocation. The IG received a 2-hour didactic and interactive training, using video examples. The primary outcome was the agreement between the participants' and an expert assessment of patient involvement in a video recorded consultation. The SDM-knowledge score was a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Compared to the CG (n = 65), the IG (n = 69) judged involvement behavior in a communication example more accurately (mean difference of weighted T, adjusted for age and gender:=-0.098, p = 0.028) and demonstrated better knowledge (mean difference=-0.58; p = 0.014). A sensitivity analysis entering a random effect for cluster turned out not significant.

CONCLUSION

The interprofessional group training can improve HCPs' SDM-competencies.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Addressing interprofessional teams using SDM communication training could supplement existing SDM training approaches. More research is needed to evaluate the training module's effects as a component of large-scale implementation of SDM.

Predictors of Decision Regret among Caregivers of Older Canadians Receiving Home Care: A Cross-Sectional Online Survey

Background. In Canada, caregivers of older adults receiving home care face difficult decisions that may lead to decision regret. We assessed difficult decisions and decision regret among caregivers of older adults receiving home care services and factors associated with decision regret. Methods. From March 13 to 30, 2020, at the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted an online survey with caregivers of older adults receiving home care in the 10 Canadian provinces. We distributed a self-administered questionnaire through Canada’s largest and most representative private online panel. We identified types of difficult health-related decisions faced in the past year and their frequency and evaluated decision regret using the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), scored from 0 to 100. We performed descriptive statistics as well as bivariable and multivariable linear regression to identify factors predicting decision regret. Results. Among 932 participants, the mean age was 42.2 y (SD = 15.6 y), and 58.4% were male. The most frequently reported difficult decisions were regarding housing and safety (75.1%). The mean DRS score was 28.8/100 (SD = 8.6). Factors associated with less decision regret included higher caregiver age, involvement of other family members in the decision-making process, wanting to receive information about the options, and considering organizations interested in the decision topic and health care professionals as trustworthy sources of information (all P < 0.001). Factors associated with more decision regret included mismatch between the caregiver’s preferred option and the decision made, the involvement of spouses in the decision-making process, higher decisional conflict, and higher burden of care (all P < 0.001). Discussion. Decisions about housing and safety were the difficult decisions most frequently encountered by caregivers of older adults in this survey. Our results will inform future decision support interventions.

Does Adding Training in Shared Decision Making for Home Care Teams to Providing Decision Guides Better Engage Frail Elders and Caregivers in Housing Decisions? :A Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Trial

Background

Frail older adults and caregivers need support from their home care teams in making difficult housing decisions, such as whether to remain at home, with or without assistance, or move into residential care. However, home care teams are often understaffed and busy, and shared decision-making training is costly. Nevertheless, overall awareness of shared decision-making is increasing. We hypothesized that distributing a decision aid could be sufficient for providing decision support without the addition of shared decision-making training for home care teams.

Objective

We evaluated the effectiveness of adding web-based training and workshops for care teams in interprofessional shared decision-making to passive dissemination of a decision guide on the proportion of frail older adults or caregivers of cognitively-impaired frail older adults reporting active roles in housing decision-making.

Methods

We conducted a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial with home care teams in 9 health centers in Quebec, Canada. Participants were frail older adults or caregivers of cognitively impaired frail older adults facing housing decisions and receiving care from the home care team at one of the participating health centers. The intervention consisted of a 1.5-hour web-based tutorial for the home care teams plus a 3.5-hour interactive workshop in interprofessional shared decision-making using a decision guide that was designed to support frail older adults and caregivers in making housing decisions. The control was passive dissemination of the decision guide. The primary outcome was an active role in decision-making among frail older adults and caregivers, measured using the Control Preferences Scale. Secondary outcomes included decisional conflict and perceptions of how much care teams involved frail older adults and caregivers in decision-making. We performed an intention-to-treat analysis.

Results

A total of 311 frail older adults were included in the analysis, including 208 (66.9%) women, with a mean age of 81.2 (SD 7.5) years. Among 339 caregivers of cognitively-impaired frail older adults, 239 (70.5%) were female and their mean age was 66.4 (SD 11.7) years. The intervention increased the proportion of frail older adults reporting an active role in decision-making by 3.3% (95% CI –5.8% to 12.4%, P=.47) and the proportion of caregivers of cognitively-impaired frail older adults by 6.1% (95% CI -11.2% to 23.4%, P=.49). There was no significant impact on the secondary outcomes. However, the mean score for the frail older adults’ perception of how much health professionals involved them in decision-making increased by 5.4 (95% CI −0.6 to 11.4, P=.07) and the proportion of caregivers who reported decisional conflict decreased by 7.5% (95% CI −16.5% to 1.6%, P=.10).

Conclusions

Although it slightly reduced decisional conflict for caregivers, shared decision-making training did not equip home care teams significantly better than provision of a decision aid for involving frail older adults and their caregivers in decision-making.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02592525; https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02592525

Decisional needs of patients with recurrent high-grade glioma and their families

Background

High-grade gliomas are aggressive and life-threatening brain tumors. At the time of recurrence, the patients and their families need to decide on future treatment. None of the treatment options are curative, and tradeoffs between benefits and harms must be made. This study aimed to explore the patients’ and family members’ decisional needs when making the decision.

Methods

We performed semi-structured individual interviews with patients and family members to explore their experiences during the decision making. A phenomenological hermeneutical analysis was conducted.

Results

A total of 15 patients and 14 family members aged 22-79 years participated in the study. Most of the family members were partners to the patient. The findings were centered around three interrelated and concurrently occurring themes: (I) A patient- and family-centered decision making, including the subtheme of being a supportive family member; (II) Balanced information and a trustful professional encounter; and (III) The value of hope. We found that both the patients and family members preferred to be involved in the decision making and that a trustful relationship with the surgeon, balanced and tailored information, and sufficient time to make the decision were essential. The experience of hope had a significant influence on patients’ decisions.

Conclusion

This study found that patient and family involvement, balanced information, and hope were the primary decisional needs of patients and family members at the time of recurrent high-grade glioma. Patients and family members can have different decisional needs, making individual needs assessment essential to decisional support.

Recognizing patient partner contributions to health research: a mixed methods research protocol

BACKGROUND

The overall aim of this program of research is to assess when/how patient partners are compensated financially for their contributions to health research. The research program consists of three studies to address the following questions: (1) What is the prevalence of reporting patient partner financial compensation? (2) What are researcher and institutional attitudes around patient partner financial compensation? (3) What are the current practices of patient partner financial compensation and what guidance exists to inform these practices?

METHODS

In our first project, we will conduct a systematic review to assess the prevalence of reporting patient partner financial compensation and identify current financial compensation practices on an international scale. We will identify a cohort of published studies that have engaged patients as partners through a forward citation search of the Guidance for Reporting the Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP I and II) checklists. We will extract details of financial compensation (type of financial compensation, amount, payment frequency etc.) and reported benefits, challenges, barriers and enablers to financially compensating patient partners. Quantitative data will be analyzed descriptively, and qualitative data will undergo thematic analysis. In our second project, we will conduct a cross-sectional survey of researchers who have engaged patient partners. We will also survey members of their affiliated institutions to gain further understanding of stakeholder experiences and attitudes with patient partner financial compensation. Survey responses will be analyzed by calculating prevalence. In our third project, we will conduct a scoping review to identify all published guidance and policy documents that guide patient partner financial compensation. Overton, the largest available online database of international policy documents, and the grey literature will be systematically searched. Data items will be extracted and presented descriptively. A comprehensive overview of guidance documents will be presented, which will represent a repository of resources that stakeholders can refer to when developing a financial compensation strategy.

DISCUSSION

Our three studies will not only inform and assist patient partners and researchers by informing compensation strategies, but also support the inclusion of diverse perspectives. We will disseminate findings through traditional mediums (publications, conferences) as well as social media, non-technical summaries, and visual abstracts.

Advancing towards the implementation of patient-centred care in Chile: An opportunity to effectively practice shared decision-making

In Chile, local normative and guidelines place patient-centred care (PCC) as a desirable means and outcome for each level of health care. Thus, a definition of PCC is provided, and for the first time shared decision-making (SDM) is included as an intended practice. During the past five years the country has shown progress on the implementation of PCC. A large pilot study was conducted in one of the Metropolitan Health Services, and now the health authority is committed to escalate a PCC strategy nationwide. From the practice domain, most of the work is being placed on the training of health professionals. Patients' preparation for the clinical encounter is scarce, thereby limiting their potential to participate in their care. At the research domain, the country shows a strengthened agenda that has advanced from a diagnostic phase (including the exploration from social sciences) to a purposeful stage which involves the development of training programs, patient decision aids, international collaborations, and other PCC interventions. The country is now positioned to secure new initiatives to empower patients and allow them to take an active role, as a key component of PCC and SDM.

Shared decision-making in Canada: Update on integration of evidence in health decisions and patient-centred care government mandates

In Canada, government mandates for patient-centred care (PCC) vary across the 10 provinces and three territories. Although basic medical and hospital services are provided for all, health care options for patients also depend on having private insurance. Thus, the current design of the Canadian healthcare system has several implications for PCC and shared decision-making (SDM). Since 2007, this is our fourth update on SDM in Canada. The aim of this paper is to provide an update on the current state of SDM and patient and public involvement in Canada. Overall, we still observed the difficulty of implementing any sort of national strategy partly because of the decentralized nature of the healthcare system. Second, national professional education programs are complicated by licensure and scope of practice variations across jurisdictions. Third, there are variations in the availability of different options covered by universal healthcare. Canada has experienced some favorable development as PCC is now explicitly articulated in the policies of most provinces and territories and there are increased efforts to give patients more access to their electronic health records. However, patient and public engagement (PPE) reform in health programs and governance remains an exception, and continuing centralization of governance structures may reduce their responsiveness to patient priorities. In a 2018 survey, 47.2% of respondents reported that they were not told by their health professional that they had a choice about treatment. Nonetheless, decision aids and decision coaching are increasingly available for health-related decisions and the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute's decision aid inventory has ensured continued leadership in this area. Diverse jurisdictions are starting to embed decision aids into care pathways, with some decision aids being included in clinical practice guidelines. The COVID-19 pandemic may have had a negative impact on SDM by removing decision choices due to emergency public health mandates, but stimulated new research and decision aids. Canada continues to assign health research funding to SDM and PCC, and a program dedicated to patient-oriented research is central to this effort. Guides and frameworks are increasingly available for planning and evaluating PPE. Finally, various initiatives are attempting to involve and empower Indigenous peoples through PPE and SDM.

Choosing a Birth Setting: A Shared Decision-Making Approach

Perinatal outcomes vary widely depending on individual birth settings (birth center, home, and hospital). The purpose of this case study is to explore a patient-centered, shared decision-making approach to achieve an informed, values-based choice about birth settings. Engaging in a shared decision-making approach regarding birth setting options would support people to have the information and ability to judge for themselves how benefits and risks across birth center, home, and hospital settings would best fit with their values and personal health. A patient decision aid about birth setting options could facilitate increased equity regarding access to birth settings that offer improved perinatal health outcomes, helping to reduce perinatal health disparities in the United States.

Online patient information for hysterectomies: a systematic environmental scan of quality and readability

OBJECTIVE

Hysterectomy is a common gynaecological procedure, and therefore online information is highly valuable to patients. Our objective was to evaluate the quality, readability, and comprehensiveness of online patient information on hysterectomy.

METHODS

The first 25 patient-directed websites on hysterectomy, identified using 5 online search engines (Google, Yahoo, AOL, Bing, Ask.com) as well as clinical professional societies, were assessed using validated tools for quality (DISCERN, JAMA benchmark), readability (Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level [FKGL], Gunning Fog, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook [SMOG], Flesch Reading Ease Score [FRES]), and completeness of information.

RESULTS

We identified 50 websites for inclusion. Overall, websites were of good quality (median DISCERN score 53/80 [interquartile range {IQR} 47-61]; median JAMA score 3/4 [IQR 1-4]). Most websites described surgical risks (39, 78%), benefits (45, 90%), and types of hysterectomy(48, 96%). Content readability corresponded to Grade 11 using FKGL (median 11.1 [IQR 10.2-13.0]) and SMOG (median 10.9 [IQR 10.2-12.4]), or 15 years education using Gunning Fog (median 14.7 [IQR 13.8-16.4]). Websites were assessed as difficult to read using FRES (median 45.6/100 [IQR 37.9-50.9]). No differences were observed in readability scores when we compared websites from clinical professional societies, government, health care, or academic organizations with other websites (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Online patient information on hysterectomy is of good quality and comprehensive. However, the content is above the American Medical Association's recommended grade 6 reading level. Website authors should consider readability to make their content more accessible to patients.

Exploring Parental Decision Making for a Child With a Life-Limiting Condition: An Interpretive Description Study

The purpose of this study was to explore parents' and health care professionals' perception of parents' experiences in making decisions between acute and palliative therapies along the trajectory of their child's life-limiting condition. An interpretive description qualitative study was conducted. Semistructured interviews were completed with 6 parents and 6 health care professionals. Qualitative thematic analysis was used to identify, analyze, and report 4 themes: (1) "Going by your heart and gut": the process of making a unique decision; (2) "Not black and white": experiencing decisional conflict when making difficult decisions; (3) "Widening the circle of care": various sources of decision-making support; and (4) "Always a worry": concerns regarding parents' decision quality and outcomes. Parents described experiencing decisional conflict when making health care decisions for their child with a life-limiting condition. Decision support provided by health care professionals in an interprofessional manner was preferred and supplemented by a parent-based support network. Reassurance regarding their good parenting from health care professionals was described as supportive throughout the decision-making experience.

Defining successful outcomes and preferences for clinical management in differences/disorders of sex development: Protocol overview and a qualitative phenomenological study of stakeholders' perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Utilizing a qualitative phenomenological design, the Defining Successful Outcomes and Trade-offs study examined stakeholder perspectives regarding optimal healthcare delivery and outcomes for individuals with a difference/disorder of sex development (DSD).

OBJECTIVE

We describe study methods and provide an overview of themes and subthemes.

STUDY DESIGN

Interviews were conducted with individuals with a DSD (n = 24), parents of those with a DSD (n = 19), healthcare providers (n = 37), and others (n = 30). Primary questions regarding clinical management of patients with DSD were: "What is a successful outcome?" and "How do you achieve it?"

RESULTS

Themes included: understanding of DSD diagnosis and self-efficacy in management is necessary but complex; patient and family psychological well-being; support from others versus being stigmatized; affected person experiences physical health and accepts the implications of their condition; complexities in DSD decision making, roles and expectations; and knowledgeable providers and multidisciplinary teams are essential, notwithstanding persisting barriers. Participants recognized competing values potentially forcing trade-offs in decision making.

DISCUSSION

Recognition of diverse and sometimes conflicting perspectives regarding optimal pathways of care and outcomes - both within and among those with DSD and their providers -promises to enhance shared decision making.

CONCLUSION

Diverse perspectives and perceptions of trade-offs associated with DSD healthcare emphasize the need to tailor care for patients and families.