Family History Collection Practices: National Survey of Pediatric Primary Care Providers

While family history (FH) collection is a core responsibility of pediatric primary care providers (PCPs), few details about this practice are known. We surveyed a random national sample of 1200 pediatricians and family medicine physicians about FH collection practices. A total of 86% of respondents (n = 289 pediatricians; n = 152 family medicine physicians) indicated that they collect a FH "always" or "most of the time" with 77% reporting collection at the first visit, regardless of whether it is a health maintenance or problem-focused visit. Less than half ask about relatives other than parents, siblings, or grandparents (36.3%). Among respondents, 42% routinely update the FH at every health maintenance visit while 6% updated FH at every visit. Pediatric PCPs use a variety of methods to collect a FH that is limited in scope and variably updated. Our results suggest that interventions are needed to help pediatric PCPs collect a systematic, efficient, and updated FH.

A Web-Based Decision Tool to Improve Contraceptive Counseling for Women With Chronic Medical Conditions: Protocol For a Mixed Methods Implementation Study

BACKGROUND

Women with chronic medical conditions, such as diabetes and hypertension, have a higher risk of pregnancy-related complications compared with women without medical conditions and should be offered contraception if desired. Although evidence based guidelines for contraceptive selection in the presence of medical conditions are available via the United States Medical Eligibility Criteria (US MEC), these guidelines are underutilized. Research also supports the use of decision tools to promote shared decision making between patients and providers during contraceptive counseling.

OBJECTIVE

The overall goal of the MiHealth, MiChoice project is to design and implement a theory-driven, Web-based tool that incorporates the US MEC (provider-level intervention) within the vehicle of a contraceptive decision tool for women with chronic medical conditions (patient-level intervention) in community-based primary care settings (practice-level intervention). This will be a 3-phase study that includes a predesign phase, a design phase, and a testing phase in a randomized controlled trial. This study protocol describes phase 1 and aim 1, which is to determine patient-, provider-, and practice-level factors that are relevant to the design and implementation of the contraceptive decision tool.

METHODS

This is a mixed methods implementation study. To customize the delivery of the US MEC in the decision tool, we selected high-priority constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Theoretical Domains Framework to drive data collection and analysis at the practice and provider level, respectively. A conceptual model that incorporates constructs from the transtheoretical model and the health beliefs model undergirds patient-level data collection and analysis and will inform customization of the decision tool for this population. We will recruit 6 community-based primary care practices and conduct quantitative surveys and semistructured qualitative interviews with women who have chronic medical conditions, their primary care providers (PCPs), and clinic staff, as well as field observations of practice activities. Quantitative survey data will be summarized with simple descriptive statistics and relationships between participant characteristics and contraceptive recommendations (for PCPs), and current contraceptive use (for patients) will be examined using Fisher exact test. We will conduct thematic analysis of qualitative data from interviews and field observations. The integration of data will occur by comparing, contrasting, and synthesizing qualitative and quantitative findings to inform the future development and implementation of the intervention.

RESULTS

We are currently enrolling practices and anticipate study completion in 15 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This protocol describes the first phase of a multiphase mixed methods study to develop and implement a Web-based decision tool that is customized to meet the needs of women with chronic medical conditions in primary care settings. Study findings will promote contraceptive counseling via shared decision making and reflect evidence-based guidelines for contraceptive selection.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03153644; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03153644 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6yUkA5lK8).

Planning for a Nondriving Future: Behaviors and Beliefs Among Middle-Aged and Older Drivers

Despite the reality of older adults living many years after driving cessation, few prepare for the eventuality; empirically, planning for a nondriving future has not been directly quantified or explored. The following study quantifies (1) the extent of current drivers’ planning; (2) specific planning behaviors; (3) beliefs about benefits of planning; (4) drivers’ intention to plan more for future transportation needs; and (5) group differences associated with planning. In a predominantly female, black, urban sample of current drivers ages 53–92, fewer than half (42.1%) had planned at all for a nondriving future, with correspondingly low levels of planning behaviors reported. However, over 80% believed planning would help them meet their needs post-cessation and transition emotionally to being a nondriver. Most (85%) intended to plan more in the future as well, indicating further potential openness to the topic. Drivers who planned were older, drove less frequently, limited their driving to nearby places, reported less difficulty believing they would become a nondriver, and expected to continue driving three years less than non-planners. These findings suggest that drivers’ perceived nearness to driving cessation impacts planning for future transportation needs, and existing perceived benefits of planning may provide leverage to motivate action.

Communication of Scientific Uncertainty about a Novel Pandemic Health Threat: Ambiguity Aversion and Its Mechanisms

Communicating scientific uncertainty about public health threats is ethically desirable but challenging due to its tendency to promote avoidance of choice options with unknown probabilities-a phenomenon known as "ambiguity aversion." This study examined this phenomenon's potential magnitude, its responses to different communication strategies, and its mechanisms. In a factorial experiment, 2701 adult laypersons in Spain read one of three versions of a hypothetical newspaper article describing a pandemic vaccine-preventable disease (VPD), but varying in scientific uncertainty about VPD risk and vaccine effectiveness: No-Uncertainty, Uncertainty, and Normalized-Uncertainty (emphasizing its expected nature). Vaccination intentions were lower for the Uncertainty and Normalized-Uncertainty groups compared to the No-Uncertainty group, consistent with ambiguity aversion; Uncertainty and Normalized-Uncertainty groups did not differ. Ambiguity-averse responses were moderated by health literacy and mediated by perceptions of vaccine effectiveness, VPD likelihood, and VPD severity. Communicating scientific uncertainty about public health threats warrants caution and further research to elucidate its outcomes, mechanisms, and management.

Effects of Influenza Strain Label on Worry and Behavioral Intentions

Persons who read information about a hypothetical influenza strain with scientific (H11N3 influenza) or exotic-sounding (Yarraman flu) name reported higher worry and vaccination intentions than did those who read about strains named after an animal reservoir (horse flu). These findings suggest that terms used for influenza in public communications can influence reactions.

Effect of Harm Anchors in Visual Displays of Test Results on Patient Perceptions of Urgency About Near-Normal Values: Experimental Study

Background

Patient-facing displays of laboratory test results typically provide patients with one reference point (the “standard range”).

Objective

To test the effect of including an additional harm anchor reference point in visual displays of laboratory test results, which indicates how far outside of the standard range values would need to be in order to suggest substantial patient risk.

Methods

Using a demographically diverse, online sample, we compared the reactions of 1618 adults in the United States who viewed visual line displays that included both standard range and harm anchor reference points (“Many doctors are not concerned until here”) to displays that included either (1) only a standard range, (2) standard range plus evaluative categories (eg, “borderline high”), or (3) a color gradient showing degree of deviation from the standard range.

Results

Providing the harm anchor reference point significantly reduced perceived urgency of close-to-normal alanine aminotransferase and creatinine results (P values <.001) but not generally for platelet count results. Notably, display type did not significantly alter perceptions of more extreme results in potentially harmful ranges. Harm anchors also substantially reduced the number of participants who wanted to contact their doctor urgently or go to the hospital about these test results.

Conclusions

Presenting patients with evaluative cues regarding when test results become clinically concerning can reduce the perceived urgency of out-of-range results that do not require immediate clinical action.

Discussion of Average versus Extreme Case Severity in Pandemic Risk Communications

To investigate determinants of the public’s perceptions of disease threat, in 2015 we conducted a randomized survey experiment in the Netherlands. Adults who read a mock news article describing average +or extreme outcomes from a hypothetical influenza pandemic were more influenced by average than by extreme case information. Presenting both types of information simultaneously appeared counterproductive.

Engaging Patients in Decisions About Cancer Screening: Exploring the Decision Journey Through the Use of a Patient Portal

INTRODUCTION

Engaging patients to make informed choices is paramount but difficult in busy practices. This study sought to engage patients outside the clinical setting to better understand how they approach cancer screening decisions, including their primary concerns and their preferences for finalizing their decision.

METHODS

Twelve primary care practices offering patients an online personal health record invited eligible patients to complete a 17-item online interactive module. Among 11,458 registered users, invitations to complete the module were sent to adults aged 50-74 years who were overdue for colorectal cancer screening and to women aged 40-49 years and men aged 55-69 who had not undergone a recent mammogram or prostate-specific antigen test, respectively.

RESULTS

The module was started by 2,355 patients and completed by 903 patients. Most respondents (76.8%) knew they were eligible for screening. Preferred next steps were talking to the clinician (76.6%), reading/research (28.6%), and consulting trusted friends/family (16.4%). Priority topics included how much screening improves life expectancy, comparative test performance, and the prevalence/health risks of the cancer. Leading fears were getting cancer/delayed detection (79.2%), abnormal results (40.5%), and testing complications (39.1%), the last referring to false test results, medical complications, or unnecessary treatments. Men eligible for prostate-specific antigen screening were more likely than women eligible for mammography to express concerns about testing complications and to prioritize weighing pros and cons over gut feelings (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although this sample was predisposed to screening, most patients wanted help in finalizing their decision. Many wanted to weigh the pros and cons and expressed fears of potential harms from screening. Understanding how patients approach decisions may help design more effective engagement strategies.

The role of the affect heuristic and cancer anxiety in responding to negative information about medical tests

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about the affective implications of communicating negative information about medical tests. This research explored how affective processes - particularly the Affect Heuristic and cancer anxiety - influence the way in which people respond to such information.

DESIGN

Participants received different types of information about PSA screening for prostate cancer and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans for migraine headaches. This was a 2 (Test harm information: present vs. absent) × 2 (Test benefit information: present vs. absent) × 2 (Test recommendation: present vs. absent) between-participants design.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Perceived risk, perceived benefit and general attitudes towards PSA and MRI testing, cancer anxiety, preferences to receive the tests vs. not.

RESULTS

As predicted by the Affect Heuristic, test harm information reduced perceived test benefits. However, information about uncertain test benefit did not increase perceived test risks. Information about the test reduced cancer anxiety, indicating defensive coping. These variables - affect, anxiety, perceived risks and benefits - all uniquely predicted test preferences.

CONCLUSION

Affective processes play an important role in how people respond to and interpret negative information about medical tests. Information about harms and information about the lack of benefit can both make a test seem less beneficial, and will reduce cancer anxiety as a result.

What Factors Influence Women's Perceptions of their Systemic Recurrence Risk after Breast Cancer Treatment?

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer patients' misunderstanding of their systemic cancer recurrence risk has consequences on decision-making and quality of life. Little is known about how women derive their risk estimates.

METHODS

Using Los Angeles and Georgia's SEER registries (2014-2015), a random sample of early-stage breast cancer patients was sent surveys about 2 to 3 months after surgery ( N = 3930; RR, 68%). We conducted an inductive thematic analysis of open-ended responses about why women chose their risk estimates in a uniquely large sub-sample ( N = 1,754). Clinician estimates of systemic recurrence risk were provided for patient sub-groups with DCIS and with low-, intermediate-, and high-risk invasive disease. Women's perceived risk of systemic recurrence (0% to 100%) was categorized as overestimation, reasonably accurate estimation, or underestimation (0% for invasive disease) and was compared across identified factors and by clinical presentation.

RESULTS

Women identified 9 main factors related to their clinical experience (e.g., diagnosis and testing; treatment) and non-clinical beliefs (e.g., uncertainty; spirituality). Women who mentioned at least one clinical experience factor were significantly less likely to overestimate their risk (12% v. 43%, P < 0.001). Most women who were influenced by "communication with a clinician" had reasonably accurate recurrence estimates (68%). "Uncertainty" and "family and personal history" were associated with overestimation, particularly for women with DCIS (75%; 84%). "Spirituality, religion, and faith" was associated with an underestimation of risk (63% v. 20%, P < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

The quantification of our qualitative results is subject to any biases that may have occurred during the coding process despite rigorous methodology.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-clinician communication is important for breast cancer patients' understanding of their numeric risk of systemic recurrence. Clinician discussions about recurrence risk should address uncertainty and relevance of family and personal history.

Graphics help patients distinguish between urgent and non-urgent deviations in laboratory test results

Objective: Most electronic health record systems provide laboratory test results to patients in table format. We tested whether presenting such results in visual displays (number lines) could improve understanding.

Materials and Methods: We presented 1620 adults recruited from a demographically diverse Internet panel with hypothetical results from several common laboratory tests, first showing near-normal results and then more extreme values. Participants viewed results in either table format (with a “standard range” provided) or one of 3 number line formats: a simple 2-color format, a format with diagnostic categories such as “borderline high” indicated by colored blocks, and a gradient format that used color gradients to smoothly represent increasing risk as values deviated from standard ranges. We measured respondents’ subjective sense of urgency about each test result, their behavioral intentions, and their perceptions of the display format.

Results: Visual displays reduced respondents’ perceived urgency and desire to contact health care providers immediately for near-normal test results compared to tables but did not affect their perceptions of extreme values. In regression analyses controlling for respondent health literacy, numeracy, and graphical literacy, gradient line displays resulted in the greatest sensitivity to changes in test results.

Discussion: Unlike tables, which only tell patients whether test results are normal or not, visual displays can increase the meaningfulness of test results by clearly defining possible values and leveraging color cues and evaluative labels.

Conclusion: Patient-facing displays of laboratory test results should use visual displays rather than tables to increase people’s sensitivity to variations in their results.

Physician Experiences and Understanding of Genomic Sequencing in Oncology

The amount of information produced by genomic sequencing is vast, technically complicated, and can be difficult to interpret. Appropriately tailoring genomic information for non-geneticists is an essential next step in the clinical use of genomic sequencing. To initiate development of a framework for genomic results communication, we conducted eighteen qualitative interviews with oncologists who had referred adult cancer patients to a matched tumor-normal tissue genomic sequencing study. In our qualitative analysis, we found varied levels of clinician knowledge relating to sequencing technology, the scope of the tumor genomic sequencing study, and incidental germline findings. Clinicians expressed a perceived need for more genetics education. Additionally, they had a variety of suggestions for improving results reports and possible resources to aid in results interpretation. Most clinicians felt genetic counselors were needed when incidental germline findings were identified. Our research suggests that more consistent genetics education is imperative in ensuring the proper utilization of genomic sequencing in cancer care. Clinician suggestions for results interpretation resources and results report modifications could be used to improve communication. Clinicians' perceived need to involve genetic counselors when incidental germline findings were found suggests genetic specialists could play a critical role in ensuring patients receive appropriate follow-up.

Understanding the Role of Message Frames on African-American Willingness to Participate in a Hypothetical Diabetes Prevention Study

The objective of this research was to evaluate the impact of message framing (e.g., highlighting health disparities vs. progress toward reducing disparities) on willingness to enroll in a hypothetical research study. African-American (AA, n = 1513) and White (n = 362) adults completed an online survey about diabetes, health behaviors including physical activity, and attitudes about research. AA participants were randomized to view a general message (same message as provided to all White participants) or 1 of 4 alternate messages that framed the need for people to participate in research in terms of race and/or health disparities. Among AAs, there were no differences in willingness to enroll in the study by message frame. However, individual characteristics including younger age, female sex, attitudes about research, a sense of obligation, and community responsibility were significant predictors of willingness to enroll in the study. AA participants who received the general message were equally willing as White participants to enroll in the study. Highlighting race and health disparities in study recruitment materials may not be needed to increase interest among AAs. Factors beyond race appear to be stronger motivators for participation. Unlike previous research, racial framing did not suppress motivation to enroll in our hypothetical study.

Parents' concerns about vaccine scheduling in Shanghai, China

BACKGROUND

Several new vaccines have been introduced into China in recent years, but some parents in China have shown concerns about the scheduling of vaccinations for young infants. This study explores caregiver concerns about children receiving multiple vaccines during a single visit and about vaccine administration in infants <6months, and assesses the degree to which these concerns are associated with ratings of the importance of different sources of vaccine information in Shanghai.

METHODS

Caregivers of children 8months to 7years presenting at immunization clinics in Shanghai completed a survey about vaccine co-administration and vaccine administration <6months of age. Respondents provided ratings of information from different sources (Internet, family/friends, other parents) and trust in doctors. We analyzed vaccine concerns using linear regression analyses that included these information sources after adjusting for socioeconomic variables.

RESULTS

Among 618 caregivers, 64% were concerned about vaccine co-administration and 31% were concerned about vaccine administration to infants <6months of age. Higher ratings of Internet as an important source of information were associated with greater concern about co-administration (β=0.11, 95% CI: 0.00, 0.22) and concern about administration at <6months of age (β=0.17, 95% CI: 0.05, 0.28). Higher ratings given to information from other parents corresponded to 0.24 points greater concern about vaccine co-administration (95% CI: 0.04, 0.44). More trust in doctors and ratings of information from friends and family were not associated with vaccine concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

Caregiver concerns about vaccine scheduling may limit China's flexibility to add vaccines to its official immunization schedule. Reporting information about vaccine safety on the Internet and bringing groups of parents together to discuss vaccines might help to ameliorate concerns about vaccine scheduling.

Communicating infectious disease prevalence through graphics: Results from an international survey

•

The impact of graphics to inform the general public on health knowledge is unknown.

•

Heat maps were evaluated as superior to dot maps or picto-trendlines.

•

Heat maps are a viable option to widely disseminate information about infectious diseases.

Background

Graphics are increasingly used to represent the spread of infectious diseases (e.g., influenza, Zika, Ebola); however, the impact of using graphics to adequately inform the general population is unknown.

Objective

To examine whether three ways of visually presenting data (heat map, dot map, or picto-trendline)—all depicting the same information regarding the spread of a hypothetical outbreak of influenza—influence intent to vaccinate, risk perception, and knowledge.

Design

Survey with participants randomized to receive a simulated news article accompanied by one of the three graphics that communicated prevalence of influenza and number of influenza-related deaths.

Setting

International online survey.

Participants

16,510 adults living in 11 countries selected using stratified random sampling based on age and gender.

Measurements

After reading the article and viewing the presented graphic, participants completed a survey that measured interest in vaccination, perceived risk of contracting disease, knowledge gained, interest in additional information about the disease, and perception of the graphic.

Results

Heat maps and picto-trendlines were evaluated more positively than dot maps. Heat maps were more effective than picto-trendlines and no different from dot maps at increasing interest in vaccination, perceived risk of contracting disease, and interest in additional information about the disease. Heat maps and picto-trendlines were more successful at conveying knowledge than dot maps. Overall, heat maps were the only graphic to be superior in every outcome.

Limitations

Results are based on a hypothetical scenario.

Conclusion

Heat maps are a viable option to promote interest in and concern about infectious diseases.

Perceptions of measles, pneumonia, and meningitis vaccines among caregivers in Shanghai, China, and the health belief model: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

In China, the measles vaccine is offered for free whereas the pneumococcal vaccine is a for-fee vaccine. This difference has the potential to influence how caregivers evaluate whether a vaccine is important or necessary for their child, but it is unclear if models of health behavior, such as the Health Belief Model, reveal the same associations for different diseases. This study compares caregiver perceptions of different diseases (measles, pneumonia and meningitis); and characterizes associations between Health Belief Model constructs and both pneumococcal vaccine uptake and perceived vaccine necessity for pneumonia, measles, and meningitis.

METHODS

Caregivers of infants and young children between 8 months and 7 years of age from Shanghai (n = 619) completed a written survey on their perceptions of measles, pneumonia, and meningitis. We used logistic regression models to assess predictors of pneumococcal vaccine uptake and vaccine necessity.

RESULTS

Only 25.2% of children had received a pneumococcal vaccine, although most caregivers believed that pneumonia (80.8%) and meningitis (92.4%), as well as measles (93.2%), vaccines were serious enough to warrant a vaccine. Perceived safety was strongly associated with both pneumococcal vaccine uptake and perceived vaccine necessity, and non-locals had 1.70 times higher odds of pneumonia vaccine necessity than non-locals (95% CI: 1.01, 2.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Most factors had a similar relationship with vaccine necessity, regardless of disease, indicating a common mechanism for how Chinese caregivers decided which vaccines are necessary. Because more caregivers believed meningitis needed a vaccine than pneumonia, health care workers should emphasize pneumococcal vaccination's ability to protect against meningitis.

Parents' Perspectives on How to Improve the Childhood Vaccination Process

Few national studies have asked parents how to improve the childhood vaccination process. We surveyed a nationally representative online panel of parents on how to improve this process, rationales for nonstandard approaches, and alternatives to the standard schedule. Twelve percent of the 1222 respondents reported using nonstandard approaches: 3.2% used a specific schedule, 6.0% had no specific schedule, and 2.5% declined all vaccinations. The most common rationales were that too many vaccines are given at once, and discomfort with vaccine ingredients. Regarding how to improve the process, parents using the standard schedule most often said nothing could be improved (51%), or better vaccine information (22%). Those using nonstandard approaches most often would have liked more choice (40%) or better vaccine information (26%). Parents' experiences with the vaccination process could be improved by offering information prior to visits, giving more information about side effects, and allowing more flexibility about vaccine scheduling.

Abstract 168: Differences in Description of Patent Foramen Ovale Influence Choice of Treatment

Background: Clinical trials of patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure for stroke prevention have produced controversial results. We investigated differences in presenting the net benefits of PFO closure or description of the PFO in a randomized vignette-based internet survey.

Methods: Adults aged 18 to 60 inclusive were recruited via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Participants read a vignette asking them to imagine that they had a minor stroke. The vignettes included three randomized factors in a 2 x 2 x 3 factorial design: a) benefit of PFO closure (no proven benefit versus ~3% absolute risk reduction, analogous to difference in individual trials versus subsequent meta-analysis); b) normalization intervention (PFO described as very common and benign for most individuals versus no such description); and c) labeling of the PFO (?PFO? versus ?hole in the heart? versus ?difference in heart structure?). Participants were then asked their choice of treatment (PFO closure or aspirin). Secondary outcomes included self-perceived stroke risk and level of anxiety about the PFO diagnosis. Regression analysis was used to assess predictors of treatment choice (logistic) and secondary outcomes (linear).

Results: 2157 participants completed the survey (54.6% female, 76.2% non-Hispanic white, median age 32 with IQR 27 – 41). Participants shown data suggesting 3% absolute risk reduction for PFO closure were more likely to choose PFO closure (30.9% vs. 7.5%, p < 0.001). The normalization intervention decreased anxiety about the PFO. The labeling intervention increased self-perceived stroke risk and had differential effects on patient anxiety (see Table for details).

Conclusion: Differences in how information is presented can influence choice of treatment, perceived stroke risk, and level of anxiety surrounding PFO-associated stroke. Future work should address the impact of information presentation on potential variability in use of PFO closure and patient psychological outcomes.

The impact of doctor-patient communication on patients' perceptions of their risk of breast cancer recurrence

PURPOSE

Doctor-patient communication is the primary way for women diagnosed with breast cancer to learn about their risk of distant recurrence. Yet little is known about how doctors approach these discussions.

METHODS

A weighted random sample of newly diagnosed early-stage breast cancer patients identified through SEER registries of Los Angeles and Georgia (2013-2015) was sent surveys about ~2 months after surgery (Phase 2, N = 3930, RR 68%). We assessed patient perceptions of doctor communication of risk of recurrence (i.e., amount, approach, inquiry about worry). Clinically determined 10-year risk of distant recurrence was established for low and intermediate invasive cancer patients. Women's perceived risk of distant recurrence (0-100%) was categorized into subgroups: overestimation, reasonably accurate, and zero risk. Understanding of risk and patient factors (e.g. health literacy, numeracy, and anxiety/worry) on physician communication outcomes was evaluated in multivariable regression models (analytic sample for substudy = 1295).

RESULTS

About 33% of women reported that doctors discussed risk of recurrence as "quite a bit" or "a lot," while 14% said "not at all." Over half of women reported that doctors used words and numbers to describe risk, while 24% used only words. Overestimators (OR .50, CI 0.31-0.81) or those who perceived zero risk (OR .46, CI 0.29-0.72) more often said that their doctor did not discuss risk. Patients with low numeracy reported less discussion. Over 60% reported that their doctor almost never inquired about worry.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective doctor-patient communication is critical to patient understanding of risk of recurrence. Efforts to enhance physicians' ability to engage in individualized communication around risk are needed.

What is a good medical decision? A research agenda guided by perspectives from multiple stakeholders

Informed and shared decision making are critical aspects of patient-centered care, which has contributed to an emphasis on decision support interventions to promote good medical decision making. However, researchers and healthcare providers have not reached a consensus on what defines a good decision, nor how to evaluate it. This position paper, informed by conference sessions featuring diverse stakeholders held at the 2015 Society of Behavioral Medicine and Society for Medical Decision Making annual meetings, describes key concepts that influence the decision making process itself and that may change what it means to make a good decision: interpersonal factors, structural constraints, affective influences, and values clarification methods. This paper also proposes specific research questions within each of these priority areas, with the goal of moving medical decision making research to a more comprehensive definition of a good medical decision, and enhancing the ability to measure and improve the decision making process.

Perceived Barriers to Implementing Individual Choosing Wisely® Recommendations in Two National Surveys of Primary Care Providers

BACKGROUND

While some research has examined general attitudes about efforts to reduce overutilization of services, such as the Choosing Wisely^® (CW) initiative, little data exists regarding primary care providers' attitudes regarding individual recommendations.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify whether particular CW recommendations were perceived by primary care providers as difficult to follow, difficult for patients to accept, or both.

DESIGN

Two national surveys, one by mail to a random sample of 2000 U.S. primary care physicians in November 2013, and the second electronically to a random sample of 2500 VA primary care providers (PCPs) in October-December 2014.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 603 U.S. primary care physicians and 1173 VA primary care providers. Response rates were 34 and 48 %, respectively.

MAIN MEASURES

PCP ratings of whether 12 CW recommendations for screening, testing and treatments applicable to adult primary care were difficult to follow and difficult for patients to accept; and ratings of potential barriers to reducing overutilization.

KEY RESULTS

For four recommendations regarding not screening or testing in asymptomatic patients, less than 20 % of PCPs found the CW recommendations difficult to accept (range 7.2-16.6 %) or difficult for patients to follow (12.2-19.3 %). For five recommendations regarding testing or treatment for symptomatic conditions, however, there was both variation in reported difficulty to follow (9.8-32 %) and a high level of reported difficulty for patients to accept (35.7-87.1 %). The most frequently reported barriers to reducing overuse included malpractice concern, patient requests for services, lack of time for shared decision making, and the number of tests recommended by specialists.

CONCLUSIONS

While PCPs found many CW recommendations easy to follow, they felt that some, especially those for symptomatic conditions, would be difficult for patients to accept. Overcoming PCPs' perceptions of patient acceptability will require approaches beyond routine physician education, feedback and financial incentives.

Parental weighting of seizure risks vs. fever risks in vaccination tradeoff decisions

As part of a survey of about vaccination beliefs, a nationally representative sample of parents of young children answered a series of tradeoff questions that asked them to choose between two vaccination approaches that differed in terms of risks of vaccine complications, number of injections, and/or vaccine effectiveness. Most parents were willing to have their children endure more injections, and many were willing to forgo disease protection, in order to reduce the rare chance of febrile seizures. Yet, most parents were unwilling to trade disease protection to reduce the risk of fever alone, even though this is correlated with the risk of febrile seizures. Vaccine risk communications need to address the heightened emotional weight that parents give to febrile seizure risk, even when the rarity of such events is explicit.