Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

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.

(Re)Conceptualising 'good' proxy decision-making for research: the implications for proxy consent decision quality

People who are unable to make decisions about participating in research rely on proxies to make a decision based on their wishes and preferences. However, patients rarely discuss their preferences about research and proxies find it challenging to determine what their wishes would be. While the process of informed consent has traditionally been the focus of research to improve consent decisions, the more conceptually complex area of what constitutes 'good' proxy decision-making for research has remained unexplored. Interventions are needed to improve and support proxy decision-making for research but are hampered by a lack of understanding about what constitutes decision quality in this context. A global increase in conditions associated with cognitive impairment such as dementia has led to an urgent need for more research into these conditions. The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent necessity to conduct research with large numbers of critically ill patients has made this need even more pressing. Much of the empirical research centres on the desire to improve decision accuracy, despite growing evidence that authenticity is more reflective of the aim of proxy decisions and concerns about the methodological flaws in authenticity-focused studies. Such studies also fail to take account of the impact of decision-making on proxies, or the considerable body of research on improving the quality of healthcare decisions. This paper reports a concept synthesis of the literature that was conducted to develop the first conceptualisation of 'good' proxy decisions about research participation. Elements of decision quality were identified across three stages of decision-making: proxy preparedness for decision-making which includes knowledge and understanding, and values clarification and preference elicitation; the role of uncertainty, decisional conflict, satisfaction and regret in the decision-making process; and preference linked outcomes and their effect. This conceptualisation provides an essential first step towards the future development of interventions to enhance the quality of proxy decision-making and ensure proxy decisions represent patients' values and preferences.

Measuring the Impact of Quantitative Information on Patient Understanding: Approaches for Assessing the Adequacy of Patient Knowledge about Colorectal Cancer Screening

Background. Guidelines recommend that decision aids disclose quantitative information to patients considering colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but the impact on patient knowledge and decision making is limited. An important challenge for assessing any disclosure involves determining when an individual has “adequate knowledge” to make a decision. Methods. We analyzed data from a trial that randomized 213 patients to view a decision aid about CRC screening that contained verbal information (qualitative arm) versus one containing verbal plus quantitative information (quantitative arm). We analyzed participants’ answers to 8 “qualitative knowledge” questions, which did not cover the quantitative information, at baseline (T0) and after viewing the decision aid (T1). We introduce a novel approach that defines adequate knowledge as correctly answering all of a subset of questions that are particularly relevant because of the participant’s test choice (“Choice-Based Knowledge Assessment”). Results. Participants in the quantitative arm answered a higher mean number of knowledge questions correctly at T1 than did participants in the qualitative arm (7.3 v. 6.9, P < 0.05), and they more frequently had adequate knowledge at T1 based on a cutoff of 6 or 7 correct out of 8 (94% v. 83%, P < 0.05, and 86% v. 71%, P < 0.05, respectively). Members of the quantitative group also more frequently had adequate knowledge at T1 when assessed by Choice-Based Knowledge Assessment (87% v. 76%, P < 0.05). Conclusions. Patients who viewed quantitative information in addition to verbal information had greater qualitative knowledge and more frequently had adequate knowledge compared with those who viewed verbal information alone, according to most ways of defining adequate knowledge. Quantitative information may have helped participants better understand qualitative or gist concepts.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID# NCT01415479

Highlights

Patients who viewed quantitative information in a decision aid about colorectal cancer screening were more knowledgeable about nonquantitative information and were more likely to have adequate knowledge according to a variety of approaches for assessing that, compared with individuals who viewed only qualitative information. This result supports the inclusion of quantitative information in decision aids. Researchers assessing patient understanding should consider a variety of ways to define adequate knowledge when assessing decision quality.

Opportunities and Challenges When Using the Electronic Health Record for Practice-Integrated Patient-Facing Interventions: The e-Assist Colon Health Randomized Trial

Background

Even after a physician recommendation, many people remain unscreened for colorectal cancer (CRC). The proliferation of electronic health records (EHRs) and tethered online portals may afford new opportunities to embed patient-facing interventions within clinic workflows and engage patients following a physician recommendation for care. We evaluated the effectiveness of a patient-facing intervention designed to complement physician office-based recommendations for CRC screening.

Design

Using a 2-arm pragmatic, randomized clinical trial, we evaluated the intervention’s effect on CRC screening use as documented in the EHR (primary outcome) and the extent to which the intervention reached the target population. Trial participants were insured, aged 50 to 75 y, with a physician recommendation for CRC screening. Typical EHR functionalities, including patient registries, health maintenance flags, best practice alerts, and secure messaging, were used to support research-related activities and deliver the intervention to enrolled patients.

Results

A total of 1,825 adults consented to trial participation, of whom 78% completed a baseline survey and were exposed to the intervention. Most trial participants (>80%) indicated an intent to be screened on the baseline survey, and 65% were screened at follow-up, with no significant differences by study arm. One-third of eligible patients were sent a secure message. Among those, more than three-quarters accessed study material.

Conclusions

By leveraging common EHR functionalities, we integrated a patient-facing intervention within clinic workflows. Despite practice integration, the intervention did not improve screening use, likely in part due to portal-based interventions not reaching those for whom the intervention may be most effective.

Implications

Embedding patient-facing interventions within the EHR enabled practice integration but may minimize program effectiveness by missing important segments of the patient population.

Highlights

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Designing and evaluating a patient decision aid for patients with locally advanced or locally recurrent rectal cancer: a national multicentre mixed methods study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 5%-10% of new rectal cancers are locally advanced (locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC)) at presentation with 4%-8% recurring (locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC)) after initial treatment. Patients with potentially curable disease have to consider many trade-offs when considering major exenterative surgery. There are no decision tools for these patients and current resources have found to not meet minimum international standards. The overall aim of this study is to produce a validated patient decision aid (PtDA) to assist patients considering radical pelvic exenteration for LARC and LRRC created in line with international minimum standards.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study is a national, multicentre mixed methods project and has been designed in keeping with guidance from the International Patient Decision Aids Standard.This study is in four stages. In stage 1, we will develop the PtDA and its content using agile developmental methodology. In stage 2, we will assess the content and face validity of the PtDA using mixed-methods with key stakeholders. In stage 3, we will assess the feasibility and efficacy of the PtDA. In stage 4, we will establish the barriers and facilitators to the use of a PtDA in the outpatient setting. Questionnaires including the QQ-10, EORTC PATSAT-C33, Preparation for Decision-Making Scale and the NoMAD survey will be analysed during the study. Interviews will be analysed using thematic analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Research ethics approval from North of Scotland Research Ethics Service 19/NS/0056 (IRAS 257890) has been granted. Results will be published in open access peer-reviewed journals, presented in conferences and distributed through bowel research UK charity. External endorsement will be sought from the International Patient Decision Standards Collaboration inventory of PtDAs.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019122933.

Communicating Absolute Fracture Risk Reduction and the Acceptance of Treatment for Osteoporosis

Healthcare professionals frequently communicate the benefits of treatments as a relative risk reduction (RRR) in the likelihood of an event occurring. Here we evaluated whether presenting the benefits of osteoporosis treatment as a RRR in fractures compared with an absolute risk reduction (ARR) changed the patient's attitudes towards accepting treatment. We surveyed 160 individuals attending a specialised osteoporosis clinic for face-to-face consultations between May 2018 and Jan 2021. They were presented with information on RRR for the treatment being considered followed by ARR and after each question were asked about how likely they would be to start treatment on a 5-point scale (1 = very likely, 5 = very unlikely). Participants were less likely to accept treatment when it was presented as ARR (mean score 2.02 vs. 2.67, p < 0.001, 95% CI for difference - 0.82 vs - 0.47) and thirty-eight participants (23.7%) declined treatment with knowledge of their ARR when they would have accepted the same treatment based on the RRR. Individuals who declined treatment had a lower 5-year risk of fracture than those who accepted treatment (9.0 vs. 12.5%, p < 0.001, 95% CI - 5.0 to - 1.6) and as fracture risk decreased, the participant was less likely to accept treatment (Spearman r - 0.32, 95% CI - 0.46 to - 0.17, p ≤ 0.001). Whilst presentation of data as ARR more accurately reflects individual benefit and helps facilitate shared decision-making, clinicians should be aware that this will lead to a proportion of patients with lower fracture risk declining treatment for osteoporosis.

Randomized evaluation of decision support interventions for atrial fibrillation: Rationale and design of the RED-AF study

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) improves the likelihood that patients will receive care in a manner consistent with their priorities. To facilitate SDM, decision aids (DA) are commonly used, both to prepare a patient before their clinician visit, as well as to facilitate discussion during the visit. However, the relative efficacy of patient-focused or encounter-based DAs on SDM and patient outcomes remains largely unknown. We aim to directly estimate the comparative effectiveness of two DA's on SDM observed in encounters to discuss stroke prevention strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

The study aims to recruit 1200 adult patients with non-valvular AF who qualify for anticoagulation therapy, and their clinicians who manage stroke prevention strategies, in a 2x2 cluster randomized multi-center trial at six sites. Two DA's were developed as interactive, online, non-linear tools: a patient decision aid (PDA) to be used by patients before the encounter, and an encounter decision aid (EDA) to be used by clinicians with their patients during the encounter. Patients will be randomized to PDA or usual care; clinicians will be randomized to EDA or usual care.

RESULTS

Primary outcomes are quality of SDM, patient decision making, and patient knowledge. Secondary outcomes include anticoagulation choice, adherence, and clinical events.

CONCLUSION

This trial is the first randomized, head-to-head comparison of the effects of an EDA versus a PDA on SDM. Our results will help to inform future SDM interventions to improve patients' AF outcomes and experiences with stroke prevention strategies.

Feasibility of an Online-Based Safety Decision Aid for Brazilian Women Living with Intimate Partner Violence: Findings from Participatory-Action Research in a One Stop Center

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a challenge in Brazil; the country is ranked 6th globally for femicide and one in four women experience physical and/or sexual IPV in their lifetimes. Safety decision aids (SDA) are tools for women experiencing IPV. Building upon previously developed and tested online SDA tools, we intend to adapt an SDA tool for use in Brazil. The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility of a technology-based SDA to support Brazilian women living with IPV, tailored for the Brazilian context. Our participatory-action research approach built upon research between 2018 and 2019 at the House of the Brazilian Woman (HBW) of Curitiba, Brazil, a cross-sectoral one-stop center (OSC) providing comprehensive care for IPV survivors. Field research included observation, field notes, and in-depth interviews with twenty-eight (n = 28) participants (HBW staff and survivors). The results were grouped into four main thematic categories: advantages; uncertainties; barriers; and suggestions. The triangulated results showed that the majority of participants considered the SDA feasible, highlighting flexibility and confidentiality; information about IPV; and access to resources for formal help-seeking as advantages of the tool. Participants also expressed uncertainties about SDA's ability to increase women's safety and its accessibility for the most vulnerable. They made suggestions for improvement to meet the unique needs of Brazilian women. This study provided evidence on the potential of an SDA tailored for use within a comprehensive program of women survivors in Brazil. This step was crucial to inform the future implementation and evaluation.

Examining Anxiety Treatment Information Needs: Web-Based Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Several treatments for anxiety are available, which can make treatment decisions difficult. Resources are often produced with limited knowledge of what information is of interest to consumers. This is a problem because there is limited understanding of what people want to know when considering help for anxiety.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine the information needs and preferences concerning treatment options for anxiety by assessing the following: what information people consider to be important when they are considering treatment options for anxiety, what information people have received on psychological and medication treatment in the past, how they received this information in the past, and whether there are any differences in information needs between specific samples and demographic groups.

METHODS

Using a web-based survey, we recruited participants from a peer-support association website (n=288) and clinic samples (psychology, n=113; psychiatry, n=64).

RESULTS

Participants in all samples wanted information on a broad range of topics pertaining to anxiety treatment. However, they reported that they did not receive the desired amount of information. Participants in the clinic samples rated the importance of information topics higher than did those in the self-help sample. When considering the anxiety treatment information received in the past, most respondents indicated receiving information from informational websites, family doctors, and mental health practitioners. In terms of what respondents want to learn about, high ratings of importance were given to topics concerning treatment effectiveness, how it works, advantages and disadvantages, what happens when it stops, and common side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

It is challenging for individuals to obtain anxiety-related information on the range of topics they desire through currently available information sources. It is also difficult to provide comprehensive information during typical clinical visits. Providing evidence-based information on the web and in a brochure format may help consumers make informed choices and support the advice provided by health professionals.

Patient beliefs and perceptions play a crucial role in the decision-making process when managing a meniscal tear. A qualitative systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

There has been an increase in research on the effectiveness of treatment options for the management of meniscal tears. However, there is very little evidence about the patient experiences of meniscal tears.

AIM

To summarise the available qualitative evidence on patients' experiences and expectations of meniscal tears.

METHOD

A search of EMBASE, Medline, Sociofile and Web of Science up to November 2020 was performed to identify studies reporting patient experiences of meniscal tears. Studies were critically appraised using the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Program) checklist, and a meta-synthesis was performed to generate third-order constructs (new themes).

RESULTS

Two studies reporting semi-structured interviews from 34 participants (24 male; 10 female) were included. The mean interview length ranged from 16 to 45 min. Five themes were generated: (1) the imaging (MRI) results are a key driver in the decision-making process, (2) surgery is perceived to be the definitive and quicker approach, (3) physiotherapy and exercise is a slower approach which brought success over time, (4) patient perceptions and preferences are important in the clinical decision-making process and, (5) the impact on patient lives is a huge driver in seeking care and treatment decisions.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to summarise the qualitative evidence on patient experiences with meniscal tears. The themes generated demonstrate the importance of patient perceptions of MRI findings and timing of treatment success as important factors in the decision-making process. This study demonstrates the need to strengthen our understanding of patients' experiences of meniscal tears.

[The informed decision as an aim of evidence-based health information: the example of cancer screening]

Um Menschen eine informierte Entscheidung über die Teilnahme an Krebsfrüherkennungsuntersuchungen zu ermöglichen, müssen neben den Vorteilen auch Nachteile wie medizinische Risiken kommuniziert werden. Die in solchen Entscheidungshilfen enthaltenen Informationen sollten evidenzbasiert, neutral, ausgewogen und verständlich sowie in ihrem Umfang angemessen sein. Das Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen (IQWiG) wurde in den Jahren 2014 und 2015 vom Gemeinsamen Bundesausschuss (G-BA) beauftragt, Entscheidungshilfen in Form von Broschüren zur Teilnahme am Mammografie‑, Darmkrebs- und Zervixkarzinomscreening zu erstellen, die inzwischen im Einsatz sind.

In diesem Beitrag wird die Entwicklung der Entscheidungshilfen beschrieben, wobei der Fokus auf deren Inhalten und den Ergebnissen der extern durchgeführten Nutzertestungen liegt. Letztere ergaben, dass 10–20 % der Testerinnen und Tester nach dem Lesen ihre Einstellung zur Teilnahme an der Früherkennungsuntersuchung innerhalb der 3 Kategorien „teilnahmebereit“, „unentschlossen“ und „nicht teilnahmebereit“ geändert haben. Das weist darauf hin, dass eine informierte Entscheidung durch die Materialien unterstützt wird. Die Nutzertestungen trugen dazu bei, die Entscheidungshilfen noch besser an die Informationsbedürfnisse der angesprochenen Gruppen anzupassen.

"Is it time to stop driving?": A randomized clinical trial of an online decision aid for older drivers

BACKGROUND

Many older adults face the difficult decision of when to stop driving. We sought to test whether an online driving decision aid (DDA) would improve decision quality.

METHODS

This prospective two-arm randomized trial enrolled English-speaking licensed drivers (age ≥70 years) without significant cognitive impairment but with ≥1 diagnosis associated with increased likelihood of driving cessation; all participants received primary care in clinics associated with study sites in three states. The intervention was the online Healthwise® DDA for older adults addressing "Is it time to stop driving?"; control was web-based information for older drivers only. The primary outcome was decision conflict as estimated by the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS; lower scores indicate higher quality). Secondary outcomes were knowledge and decision self-efficacy about driving decisions. We examined postrandomization differences in primary and secondary outcomes by study arm using generalized linear mixed-effects models with adjustment for site and prerandomization scores.

RESULTS

Among 301 participants (mean age: 77.1 years), 51.2% identified as female and the majority as non-Hispanic (99.0%) and white (95.3%); 98.0% lived in an urban area. Participant characteristics were similar by study arm but differed across sites. Intervention participants had a lower mean DCS score (12.3 DDA vs 15.2 control; adjusted mean ratio [AMR] 0.76, 95%CI 0.61-0.95; p = 0.017). Intervention participants had higher mean knowledge scores (88.9 DDA vs. 79.9 control; OR 1.13, 95%CI 1.01-1.27, p = 0.038); there was no difference between groups in self-efficacy scores. The DDA had high acceptability; 86.9% of those who viewed it said they would recommend it to others in similar situations.

CONCLUSIONS

The online Healthwise® DDA decreased decision conflict and increased knowledge in this sample of English-speaking, older adults without significant cognitive impairment, although most chose to continue driving. Use of such resources in clinical or community settings may support older adults as they transition from driving to other forms of mobility.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier "Advancing Understanding of Transportation Options (AUTO)" NCT04141891.

Shared Decision-Making and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Valvular Heart Disease

Patient-centered health care emphasizes shared decision-making (SDM), incorporating both clinical evidence and patient preferences and values. SDM is important in heart valve disease, both because there might be more than one treatment option and due to the importance of adherence after intervention. We aimed to describe patient information and involvement in decision-making about care and recording of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in valve interventions. The opinion piece and recommendations are based upon literature review and our own experience from specialist valve clinics. Before a valve intervention, adequate patient information, discussion of the various treatment options and exploring patient preferences, in line with the concept of SDM, may improve post-intervention quality of life. After intervention, patients with prosthetic heart valves require adequate counseling and close follow-up to make them more confident and competent to manage their own health, as well as to maintain the efficacy of treatment provided. PROMs inform SDM before and improve care after valve intervention, focusing on outcomes beyond mortality and morbidity. SDM may improve post-intervention quality of life. Formal PROMs questionnaires inform SDM, quantify patient centered changes and should be used more often in clinical practice and research. A thorough assessment of baseline frailty status in patients scheduled for valve intervention is essential and may affect postoperative outcome.

Patient engagement partnerships in clinical trials (PEP-CT): protocol for the systematic development and testing of patient partner and investigator decision aids

INTRODUCTION

Building capacity to improve sex/gender knowledge and strengthen patient engagement in clinical trials requires training and support. The overall goal of this 2-year project is to refine, translate and evaluate two web-based open-access patient and investigator decision aids aimed to improve patient engagement partnerships in clinical trials.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Two decision aids were designed in Phase 1 of this programme of research and this protocol describes a subsequent sequential phased approach to refine/translate (Phase 2A) and conduct alpha/usability (Phase 2B) and beta/field (Phase 3) testing. Decision aid development is guided by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, User-Centred Design, Ottawa Decision-Support Framework and the Ottawa Model of Research Use. We have integrated patient-oriented research methods by engaging patient partners across all phases of our programme of research. Decision aids will first be refined and then translated to French (Phase 2A). Eight iterative cycles of semistructured interviews with 40 participants (20 patient partners and 20 investigators) will be conducted to determine usability (Phase 2B). A pragmatic pre/post pilot study design will then be implemented for field/beta testing using another purposive sample of 80 English-speaking and French-speaking participants (40 patients and 40 investigators). The samples are purposive to ensure an equal representation of English-speaking and French-speaking participants and an equal representation of men and women. Since sex and/or gender differences in utilisation and effectiveness of decision aids have not been previously reported, Phase 3 outcomes will be reported for the total sample and separately for men and women.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been granted from the University of Toronto (41109, 28 September 2021). Informed consent will be obtained from participants. Dissemination will include co-authored publications, conference presentations, educational national public forums, fact sheets/newsletters, social media sharing and videos/webinars.

Knowledge translation of prediction rules: methods to help health professionals understand their trade-offs

Clinical prediction models are developed with the ultimate aim of improving patient outcomes, and are often turned into prediction rules (e.g. classifying people as low/high risk using cut-points of predicted risk) at some point during the development stage. Prediction rules often have reasonable ability to either rule-in or rule-out disease (or another event), but rarely both. When a prediction model is intended to be used as a prediction rule, conveying its performance using the C-statistic, the most commonly reported model performance measure, does not provide information on the magnitude of the trade-offs. Yet, it is important that these trade-offs are clear, for example, to health professionals who might implement the prediction rule. This can be viewed as a form of knowledge translation. When communicating information on trade-offs to patients and the public there is a large body of evidence that indicates natural frequencies are most easily understood, and one particularly well-received way of depicting the natural frequency information is to use population diagrams. There is also evidence that health professionals benefit from information presented in this way.Here we illustrate how the implications of the trade-offs associated with prediction rules can be more readily appreciated when using natural frequencies. We recommend that the reporting of the performance of prediction rules should (1) present information using natural frequencies across a range of cut-points to inform the choice of plausible cut-points and (2) when the prediction rule is recommended for clinical use at a particular cut-point the implications of the trade-offs are communicated using population diagrams. Using two existing prediction rules, we illustrate how these methods offer a means of effectively and transparently communicating essential information about trade-offs associated with prediction rules.

Value of Patient-Centered Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Present the value of a person-centered approach in diabetes management and review current evidence supporting its practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Early evidence from glycemic control trials in diabetes resulted in most practice guidelines adopting a glucose-centric intensive approach for management of the disease, consistently relying on HbA1c as a marker of metabolic control and success. This paradigm has been recently dispelled by new evidence that shows that intensive glycemic control does not provide a significant benefit regarding patient-important microvascular and macrovascular hard outcomes when compared to moderate glycemic targets. The goals of diabetes therapy are to reduce the risks of acute and chronic complications and increase quality of life while incurring least burden of treatment and disruption to the patient's life. A person-centered approach to diabetes management is achieved through shared decision making, integration of evidence-based care and patient´s needs, values and preferences, and minimally disruptive approaches to diabetes care and at the same time offer practical guidance to clinicians and patients on achieving this type of care.

Problems with the MetaBLIND study: An examination of data on blinding patients in trials with patient-reported outcomes

MetaBLIND is the largest meta-epidemiological study on the impact of blinding in randomized trials to date. We examined MetaBLIND data on the impact of blinding patients on patient-reported outcomes. 68 out of 132 included trials tested knowledge recall and had questionable relevance to clinical trials. In 17 out of 18 comparisons, the number of trials in the blinded or nonblinded group was 2 or lower. In several key trials, the blinding status was uncertain. Effect sizes compared in MetaBLIND appear to reflect random differences in study design and setting rather than the impact of blinding trial participants.

A patient decision aid for breast cancer patients deciding on their radiation treatment, no change in decisional conflict but better informed choices

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In selected breast cancer patients, radiation treatment (RT) lowers the recurrence risk, with minor or no improvement of survival. In these patients, the choice to undergo RT is considered a preference-sensitive decision. To facilitate shared decision-making (SDM) for this choice, a patient decision aid was made. We aimed to evaluate the effect of the PtDA on decisional conflict.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a multi-center pre- and post-intervention study (BRASA-trial). The first 214 patients made a choice without support of the PtDA; the subsequent 189 patients received a link to the PtDA. The primary endpoint was decisional conflict; secondary endpoints were perceived SDM and knowledge on treatment options. Patients filled out questionnaires immediately after, and three months after their decision. Data were analyzed with multi-level regression analysis.

RESULTS

After correcting for the difference in age and educational level, the mean (±SD) decisional conflict for the intervention group (27.3 ± 11.4) was similar to the control group (26.8 ± 11.4; difference = 0.86, 95 %CI 1.67,3.36) three months after their decision. This also applied to perceived SDM. Patients exposed to the PtDA pursued additional treatment less often (45% vs 56%, odds ratio 0.59, 95 %CI 0.37,0.95) and scored significantly higher on the knowledge test (7.4 ± 2.5 vs 6.1 ± 2.7, corrected difference = 1.0, 95 %CI 0.50,1.49). There was no significant increase in consultation time.

CONCLUSIONS

Handing out the PtDA was not associated with improved scores in decisional conflict or perceived SDM, but it was associated with a choice for less additional treatment and better knowledge about the treatment options.

Making complex decisions in uncertain times: experiences of Dutch GPs as gatekeepers regarding hospital referrals during COVID-19-a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

General practitioners often act as gatekeeper, authorizing patients' access to hospital care. This gatekeeping role became even more important during the current COVID-19 crisis as uncertainties regarding COVID-19 made estimating the desirability of hospital referrals (for outpatient or inpatient hospitalization) complex, both for COVID and non-COVID suspected patients. This study explored Dutch general practitioners' experiences and ethical dilemmas faced in decision making about hospital referrals in times of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with Dutch general practitioners working in the Netherlands were conducted. Participants were recruited via purposive sampling. Thematic analysis was conducted using content coding.

RESULTS

Fifteen interviews were conducted, identifying four themes: one overarching regarding (1) COVID-19 uncertainties, and three themes about experienced ethical dilemmas: (2) the patients' self-determination vs. the general practitioners' paternalism, (3) the general practitioners' duty of care vs. the general practitioners' autonomy rights, (4) the general practitioners' duty of care vs. adequate care provision.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of knowledge about COVID-19, risks to infect loved ones, scarcity of hospital beds and loneliness of patients during hospital admission were central in dilemmas experienced. When developing guidelines for future crises, this should be taken into account.

Examining Different Factors in Web-Based Patients' Decision-Making Process: Systematic Review on Digital Platforms for Clinical Decision Support System

(1) Background: The appearance of physician rating websites (PRWs) has raised researchers’ interest in the online healthcare field, particularly how users consume information available on PRWs in terms of online physician reviews and providers’ information in their decision-making process. The aim of this study is to consistently review the early scientific literature related to digital healthcare platforms, summarize key findings and study features, identify literature deficiencies, and suggest digital solutions for future research. (2) Methods: A systematic literature review using key databases was conducted to search published articles between 2010 and 2020 and identified 52 papers that focused on PRWs, different signals in the form of PRWs’ features, the findings of these studies, and peer-reviewed articles. The research features and main findings are reported in tables and figures. (3) Results: The review of 52 papers identified 22 articles for online reputation, 15 for service popularity, 16 for linguistic features, 15 for doctor–patient concordance, 7 for offline reputation, and 11 for trustworthiness signals. Out of 52 studies, 75% used quantitative techniques, 12% employed qualitative techniques, and 13% were mixed-methods investigations. The majority of studies retrieved larger datasets using machine learning techniques (44/52). These studies were mostly conducted in China (38), the United States (9), and Europe (3). The majority of signals were positively related to the clinical outcomes. Few studies used conventional surveys of patient treatment experience (5, 9.61%), and few used panel data (9, 17%). These studies found a high degree of correlation between these signals with clinical outcomes. (4) Conclusions: PRWs contain valuable signals that provide insights into the service quality and patient treatment choice, yet it has not been extensively used for evaluating the quality of care. This study offers implications for researchers to consider digital solutions such as advanced machine learning and data mining techniques to test hypotheses regarding a variety of signals on PRWs for clinical decision-making.

Harnessing Machine Learning to Personalize Web-Based Health Care Content

Web-based health care content has emerged as a primary source for patients to access health information without direct guidance from health care providers. The benefit of this approach is dependent on the ability of patients to access engaging high-quality information, but significant variability in the quality of web-based information often forces patients to navigate large quantities of inaccurate, incomplete, irrelevant, or inaccessible content. Personalization positions the patient at the center of health care models by considering their needs, preferences, goals, and values. However, the traditional methods used thus far in health care to determine the factors of high-quality content for a particular user are insufficient. Machine learning (ML) uses algorithms to process and uncover patterns within large volumes of data to develop predictive models that automatically improve over time. The health care sector has lagged behind other industries in implementing ML to analyze user and content features, which can automate personalized content recommendations on a mass scale. With the advent of big data in health care, which builds comprehensive patient profiles drawn from several disparate sources, ML can be used to integrate structured and unstructured data from users and content to deliver content that is predicted to be effective and engaging for patients. This enables patients to engage in their health and support education, self-management, and positive behavior change as well as to enhance clinical outcomes.

Grounded theory qualitative approach from Foucault's ethical perspective: Deconstruction of patient self-determination in the clinical setting

This paper aims to explain the construction of the autonomous subject from Foucault's ethical perspective for the qualitative analysis of interprofessional relationships, patient-professional relationships, and moral ethics critique. Foucault tried to break loose from the self, which is merely the result of a biopolitical subjectivation and constituted an interpersonal level. From this, different elements involved in the decision-making capacity of patients in a clinical setting were analysed. Firstly, the context in which decision-making occurs has been explained, distinguishing between traditional practices involved in self-care and the more modern conceptions that make certain possible transformations. Secondly, an attempt is made to explain the formation of the medicalisation of society using the transformations of what Foucault called "techniques of the self". Finally, the ethical framework for a subject's "self-creation", insisting more on the exercises of self-subjectivation, reinforcing the ethics of the self by itself, the "care of the self", has been explained. The role of the patient is understood as an autonomous subject to the extent that the clinical institution and the professionals involved comprehend how the patient's autonomy in the clinical environment is constituted. All these elements could generate grounded theory on the qualitative methodology of this phenomenon. The current ethical model based on universal principles is not useful to provide a capacity for patients decision-making, relegating to the background their opinions and beliefs. Consequently, a new ethical perspective emerges that aims to return the patient to the fundamental axis of attention.

Effectiveness of patient decision aids for total hip and knee arthroplasty decision-making: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs) compared to alternative interventions (including usual care) on decision quality and quality of the decision-making process for adults with hip and knee osteoarthritis considering primary elective total joint arthroplasty.

METHODS

A systematic review guided by Cochrane methods and PRISMA reporting guidelines. Studies were searched in five databases. Included studies were RCTs evaluating the effect of PtDAs on total joint arthroplasty decision-making. Study quality was appraised with Cochrane's risk of bias tool. Quality and strength of recommendations were appraised with GRADE.

RESULTS

Ten included studies were conducted in North American using the same PtDA. Compared to usual care, PtDA groups demonstrated increased decision quality (e.g., higher knowledge, more informed values-based choices) and quality of the decision making process (e.g., decreased decisional conflict) (6 trials). Secondary outcomes showed increased surgeon satisfaction within the consultation and no difference in patient satisfaction or uptake of the chosen option (surgery: RR 1.03, 95% CI = 0.84 to 1.25; I² = 66%; 4 trials). When PtDAs formtats were compared, there were similar effects but no difference between PtDAs (4 trials).

CONCLUSIONS

There was low to very low GRADE certainty of evidence for the effect of PtDAs on decision quality and quality of the decision-making process compared to usual care. No differences were found when different formats of PtDAs were compared (moderate to very low GRADE certainty of evidence).

Perceived Facilitators of and Barriers to Implementation of a Decision Support Tool for Adolescent Depression and Suicidality Screening: Focus Group and Interview Study

BACKGROUND

Screening Wizard (SW) is a technology-based decision support tool aimed at guiding primary care providers (PCPs) to respond to depression and suicidality screens in adolescents. Separate screens assess adolescents' and parents' reports on mental health symptoms, treatment preferences, and potential treatment barriers. A detailed summary is provided to PCPs, also identifying adolescent-parent discrepancies. The goal of SW is to enhance decision-making to increase the utilization of evidence-based treatments.

OBJECTIVE

This qualitative study aims to describe multi-stakeholder perspectives of adolescents, parents, and providers to understand the potential barriers to the implementation of SW.

METHODS

We interviewed 11 parents and 11 adolescents and conducted two focus groups with 18 health care providers (PCPs, nurses, therapists, and staff) across 2 pediatric practices. Participants described previous experiences with screening for depression and were shown a mock-up of SW and asked for feedback. Interviews and focus groups were transcribed verbatim, and codebooks were inductively developed based on content. Transcripts were double coded, and disagreements were adjudicated to full agreement. Completed coding was used to produce thematic analyses of the interviews and focus groups.

RESULTS

We identified five main themes across the interviews and focus groups: parents, adolescents, and pediatric PCPs agree that depression screening should occur in pediatric primary care; there is concern that accurate self-disclosure does not always occur during depression screening; SW is viewed as a tool that could facilitate depression screening and that might encourage more honesty in screening responses; parents, adolescents, and providers do not want SW to replace mental health discussions with providers; and providers want to maintain autonomy in treatment decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified that providers, parents, and adolescents are all concerned with current screening practices, mainly regarding inaccurate self-disclosure. They recognized value in SW as a computerized tool that may elicit more honest responses and identify adolescent-parent discrepancies. Surprisingly, providers did not want the SW report to include treatment recommendations, and all groups did not want the SW report to replace conversations with the PCP about depression. Although SW was originally developed as a treatment decision algorithm, this qualitative study has led us to remove this component, and instead, SW focuses on aspects identified as most useful by all groups. We hope that this initial qualitative work will improve the future implementation of SW.

Impact of a hidradenitis suppurativa patient decision aid on treatment decision making: A randomized controlled trial

Background

Patient decision aids are tools that facilitate shared decision making when clinical evidence and patient values and preferences inform the process. Evidence-based guidelines have been developed for clinicians in hidradenitis suppurativa management. To address treatment decision-making needs of hidradenitis suppurativa patients, we developed a hidradenitis suppurativa patient decision aid.

Objective

To assess the efficacy of the hidradenitis suppurativa patient decision aid during treatment decision making.

Methods

An online, participant-blinded, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial of the hidradenitis suppurativa patient decision aid versus Mayo Clinic hidradenitis suppurativa website content (Mayo) was conducted with hidradenitis suppurativa patients. Outcomes were knowledge, decisional conflict, and preparation for decision making.

Results

Forty participants fulfilled inclusion criteria and were randomized to hidradenitis suppurativa patient decision aid or Mayo. In the hidradenitis suppurativa patient decision aid group, data from 16 and 15 participants were analyzed at phases 1 and 2, respectively. In the Mayo group, data from 15 and 13 participants were analyzed at phases 1 and 2, respectively. Increased knowledge (P < .01) and preparation for decision making (P < .01), as well as reduced decisional conflict (P < .01), were observed in the hidradenitis suppurativa patient decision aid compared with the Mayo group.

Limitations

The online methodology and recruitment from online hidradenitis suppurativa support groups limits generalizability of findings.

Conclusion

A hidradenitis suppurativa patient decision aid increased knowledge and preparation for decision making and reduced decisional conflict.

Psychiatry in the Digital Age: A Blessing or a Curse?

Social distancing and the shortage of healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic, the impact of population aging on the healthcare system, as well as the rapid pace of digital innovation are catalyzing the development and implementation of new technologies and digital services in psychiatry. Is this transformation a blessing or a curse for psychiatry? To answer this question, we conducted a literature review covering a broad range of new technologies and eHealth services, including telepsychiatry; computer-, internet-, and app-based cognitive behavioral therapy; virtual reality; digital applied games; a digital medicine system; omics; neuroimaging; machine learning; precision psychiatry; clinical decision support; electronic health records; physician charting; digital language translators; and online mental health resources for patients. We found that eHealth services provide effective, scalable, and cost-efficient options for the treatment of people with limited or no access to mental health care. This review highlights innovative technologies spearheading the way to more effective and safer treatments. We identified artificially intelligent tools that relieve physicians from routine tasks, allowing them to focus on collaborative doctor-patient relationships. The transformation of traditional clinics into digital ones is outlined, and the challenges associated with the successful deployment of digitalization in psychiatry are highlighted.

Evaluation of quality and readability of online patient information on osteoporosis and osteoporosis drug treatment and recommendations for improvement

Patient information is important to help patients fully participate in their healthcare. Commonly accessed osteoporosis patient information resources were identified and assessed for readability, quality, accuracy and consistency. Resources contained inconsistencies and scored low when assessed for quality and readability. We recommend optimal language and identify information gaps to address.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this paper is to identify commonly accessed patient information resources about osteoporosis and osteoporosis drug treatment, appraise the quality and make recommendations for improvement.

METHODS

Patient information resources were purposively sampled and text extracted. Data extracts underwent assessment of readability (Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level) and quality (modified International Patient Decision Aid Standards (m-IPDAS)). A thematic analysis was conducted, and keywords and phrases were used to describe osteoporosis and its treatment identified. Findings were presented to a stakeholder group who identified inaccuracies and contradictions and discussed optimal language.

RESULTS

Nine patient information resources were selected, including webpages, a video and booklets (available online), from government, charity and private healthcare providers. No resource met acceptable readability scores for both measures of osteoporosis information and drug information. Quality scores from the modified IPDAS ranged from 21 to 64% (7-21/33). Thematic analysis was informed by Leventhal's Common-Sense Model of Disease. Thirteen subthemes relating to the identity, causes, timeline, consequences and controllability of osteoporosis were identified. Phrases and words from 9 subthemes were presented to the stakeholder group who identified a predominance of medical technical language, misleading terms about osteoporotic bone and treatment benefits, and contradictions about symptoms. They recommended key descriptors for providers to use to describe osteoporosis and treatment benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that commonly accessed patient information resources about osteoporosis have highly variable quality, scored poorly on readability assessments and contained inconsistencies and inaccuracies. We produced practical recommendations for information providers to support improvements in understanding, relevance, balance and bias, and to address information gaps.

Shared decision making in pregnancy in inflammatory bowel disease: design of a patient orientated decision aid

Background

Research has indicated a lack of disease-specific reproductive knowledge among patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) and this has been associated with increased “voluntary childlessness”. Furthermore, a lack of knowledge may contribute to inappropriate medication changes during or after pregnancy. Decision aids have been shown to support decision making in pregnancy as well as in multiple other chronic diseases. A published decision aid for pregnancy in IBD has not been identified, despite the benefit of pre-conception counselling and patient desire for a decision support tool. This study aimed to develop and test the feasibility of a decision aid encompassing reproductive decisions in the setting of IBD.

Methods

The International Patient Decision Aid Standards were implemented in the development of the Pregnancy in IBD Decision Aid (PIDA). A multi-disciplinary steering committee was formed. Patient and clinician focus groups were conducted to explore themes of importance in the reproductive decision-making processes in IBD. A PIDA prototype was designed; patient interviews were conducted to obtain further insight into patient perspectives and to test the prototype for feasibility.

Results

Issues considered of importance to patients and clinicians encountering decisions regarding pregnancy in the setting of IBD included fertility, conception timing, inheritance, medications, infant health, impact of surgery, contraception, nutrition and breastfeeding. Emphasis was placed on the provision of preconception counselling early in the disease course. Decisions relating to conception and medications were chosen as the current focus of PIDA, however content inclusion was broad to support use across preconception, pregnancy and post-partum phases. Favourable and constructive user feedback was received.

Conclusions

The novel development of a decision aid for use in pregnancy and IBD was supported by initial user testing.

Decision Making When Cancer Becomes Chronic: Needs Assessment for a Web-Based Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma Patient Decision Aid

BACKGROUND

In cancers with a chronic phase, patients and family caregivers face difficult decisions such as whether to start a novel therapy, whether to enroll in a clinical trial, and when to stop treatment. These decisions are complex, require an understanding of uncertainty, and necessitate the consideration of patients' informed preferences. For some cancers, such as medullary thyroid carcinoma, these decisions may also involve significant out-of-pocket costs and effects on family members. Providers have expressed a need for web-based interventions that can be delivered between consultations to provide education and prepare patients and families to discuss these decisions. To ensure that these tools are effective, usable, and understandable, studies are needed to identify patients', families', and providers' decision-making needs and optimal design strategies for a web-based patient decision aid.

OBJECTIVE

Following the international guidelines for the development of a web-based patient decision aid, the objectives of this study are to engage potential users to guide development; review the existing literature and available tools; assess users' decision-making experiences, needs, and design recommendations; and identify shared decision-making approaches to address each need.

METHODS

This study used the decisional needs assessment approach, which included creating a stakeholder advisory panel, mapping decision pathways, conducting an environmental scan of existing materials, and administering a decisional needs assessment questionnaire. Thematic analyses identified current decision-making pathways, unmet decision-making needs, and decision support strategies for meeting each need.

RESULTS

The stakeholders reported wide heterogeneity in decision timing and pathways. Relevant existing materials included 2 systematic reviews, 9 additional papers, and multiple educational websites, but none of these met the criteria for a patient decision aid. Patients and family members (n=54) emphasized the need for plain language (46/54, 85%), shared decision making (45/54, 83%), and help with family discussions (39/54, 72%). Additional needs included information about uncertainty, lived experience, and costs. Providers (n=10) reported needing interventions that address misinformation (9/10, 90%), foster realistic expectations (9/10, 90%), and address mistrust in clinical trials (5/10, 50%). Additional needs included provider tools that support shared decision making. Both groups recommended designing a web-based patient decision aid that can be tailored to (64/64, 100%) and delivered on a hospital website (53/64, 83%), focuses on quality of life (45/64, 70%), and provides step-by-step guidance (43/64, 67%). The study team identified best practices to meet each need, which are presented in the proposed decision support design guide.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients, families, and providers report multifaceted decision support needs during the chronic phase of cancer. Web-based patient decision aids that provide tailored support over time and explicitly address uncertainty, quality of life, realistic expectations, and effects on families are needed.

Preliminary testing of a patient decision aid for patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Background

Multiple first-line disease modifying therapies (DMTs) are available for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), each with different characteristics. We developed an interactive patient decision aid (PtDA) to promote informed shared decision-making (SDM).

Objective

To test the preliminary effectiveness of the PtDA in participants with RRMS.

Methods

Knowledge, and decisional conflict were measured pre- and post- implementation of the PtDA, SDM after the consultation, and 6-month treatment patterns were observed. Differences in scores were analyzed using descriptive statistics and paired t-tests. Qualitative interviews with patients and neurologists were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results

52 participants were recruited: most were female (81%), 40 years of age or younger (62%), and had experienced MS for less than 5 years (56%). After participants used the PtDA, there was a significant improvement in decisional conflict (change = 1.00; p < 0.001) and knowledge (change = 2.15, p < 0.001). Nearly all patients wanted SDM, and 25 (56%) reported this occurred in their consult. Qualitative results suggested the PtDA supported both patients and neurologists in making decisions.

Conclusion

This pilot study suggests that PtDA use helps RRMS patients and their clinician select a DMT. Future studies will assess the feasibility of implementation and the impact of the PtDA on timely DMT initiation and longer-term adherence.

[Definition of the quality of hand surgery]

The quality of treatment within the total concept of the healthcare system is subject to multifactorial influences. With the intention to improve the quality of hand surgery the German Society for Hand Surgery (DGH) has initiated a number of projects. These include the S3 guidelines codeveloped by the DGH, the hand trauma register of the DGH, the definition of criteria for hand surgical procedures to be performed in an outpatient setting within the framework of a consensus recommendation as well as participation in a large epidemiological study with the special documentation of pathological alterations of the hand to determine the prevalences (study of health in Pomerania, SHIP); however, within these projects the quality of treatment itself is not assessed. In the attempt to document the quality, the currently available quality indicators in hand surgery probably only evaluate the aspects really relevant for the patients to a limited extent. Therefore, the DGH participated at an early stage in the development of assessments within the international study named by the WHO as a lighthouse project. These developed and validated assessments are intended to include all aspects of the results including the individual patient view in order to precisely relate the quality of treatment to an exactly defined pattern of hand injury. The use of these assessments should permanently enable a prediction of outcome quality for each individual patient. All these projects require the largest involvement possible to collect as much data as possible. With this intention the DGH further coordinates and develops these projects within the committees of the extended executive board and attempts to motivate as many surgeons as possible to participate.

Shared decision-making in atrial fibrillation: patient-reported involvement in treatment decisions

AIMS

To determine the extent of shared decision-making (SDM), during selection of oral anticoagulant (OAC) and rhythm control treatments, in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We evaluated survey data from 1006 patients with new-onset AF enrolled at 56 US sites participating in the SATELLITE substudy of the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT II). Patients completed surveys at enrolment and at 6-month follow-up. Patients were asked about who made their AF treatment decisions. Shared decision-making was classified as one that the patient felt was an autonomous decision or a shared decision with their healthcare provider (HCP). Approximately half of patients reported that their OAC treatment decisions were made entirely by their HCP. Compared with those reporting no SDM, patients reporting SDM for OAC were more often female (47.2% vs. 38.4%), while patients reporting SDM for rhythm control were more often male (62.2% vs. 57.6%). The most important factors cited by patients during decision-making for OAC were reducing stroke and bleeding risk, and their HCP's recommendations. After adjustment, patients with self-reported understanding of OAC, and rhythm control options, had higher odds of having participated in SDM [odds ratio (OR) 2.54, confidence interval (CI): 1.75-3.68 and OR 2.36, CI: 1.50-3.71, both P ≤ 0.001, respectively].

CONCLUSION

Shared decision-making is not widely implemented in contemporary AF practice. Patient understanding about available therapeutic options is associated with a more than a two-fold higher likelihood of SDM, and may be a potential target for future interventions.

Integrating shared decision making into trial consent: A nested, cluster-randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

Using a nested, cluster-randomized trial, we tested the hypothesis that a shared decision-making intervention, as part of consent, would improve study-related knowledge.

METHODS

We developed a shared decision-makingintervention then randomized sites in a clinical trial to intervention or control (standard consent). We collected participants' knowledge (primary outcome) and decisional support data. Other data came from a clinical registry and research coordinator surveys. We compared outcomes between study arms using generalized estimating equation models, accounting for clustering. We used qualitative description to understand variation in intervention use.

RESULTS

265 individuals, from 34 sites, enrolled in the parent trial during our study period. Of those, 241 participants completed our survey. There was no knowledge difference between arms (mean difference = 0.56 (95 %CI: -3.8, 4.9)). Both groups had a considerable number of participants with misunderstandings. We also found no difference for decisional support (mean difference = 1.5 (95 %CI: -1.8, 4.8)) or enrollment rate between arms. Clinician use of the intervention varied between sites.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no differences in outcomes but demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of incorporating a shared decision-making intervention into consent.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Future work should consider adapting our intervention to other trials and more robust measurement strategies.

Development and pilot of an online, personalized risk assessment tool for a breast cancer precision medicine trial

Breast cancer risk reduction has been validated by large-scale clinical trials, but uptake remains low. A risk communication tool could provide personalized risk-reduction information for high-risk women. A low-literacy-friendly, visual, and personalized tool was designed as part of the Women Informed to Screen Depending On Measures of risk (WISDOM) study. The tool integrates genetic, polygenic, and lifestyle factors, and quantifies the risk-reduction from undertaking medication and lifestyle interventions. The development and design process utilized feedback from clinicians, decision-making scientists, software engineers, and patient advocates. We piloted the tool with 17 study participants, collecting quantitative and qualitative feedback. Overall, participants felt they better understood their personalized breast cancer risk, were motivated to reduce their risk, and considered lifestyle interventions. The tool will be used to evaluate whether risk-based screening leads to more informed decisions and higher uptake of risk-reduction interventions among those most likely to benefit.

Addressing Health Literacy in Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards

BACKGROUND

There is increasing recognition of the importance of addressing health literacy in patient decision aid (PtDA) development.

PURPOSE

An updated review as part of IPDAS 2.0 examined the extent to which PtDAs are designed to meet the needs of people with low health literacy/socially-disadvantaged populations.

DATA SOURCES

Reference lists of Cochrane reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PtDAs (2014, 2017, and upcoming 2021 versions).

STUDY SELECTION

RCTs that assessed the impact of PtDAs on low health literacy or other socially-disadvantaged groups (i.e., ≥50% participants from socially-disadvantaged groups and/or subgroup analysis in socially-disadvantaged group/s).

DATA EXTRACTION

Two researchers independently extracted data into a standardized form including PtDA development and evaluation details. We searched online repositories and emailed authors to access PtDAs to verify grade reading level, understandability, and actionability.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-five of 213 RCTs met the inclusion criteria, illustrating that only 12% of studies addressed the needs of low health literacy or other socially-disadvantaged groups. Grade reading level was calculated in 8 of 25 studies (33%), which is recommended in previous IPDAS guidelines. We accessed and independently assessed 11 PtDAs. None were written at sixth-grade level or below. Ten PtDAs met the recommended threshold for understandability, but only 5 met the recommended threshold for actionability. We also conducted a post hoc subgroup meta-analysis and found that knowledge improvements after receiving a PtDA were greater in studies that reported using strategies to reduce cognitive demand in PtDA development compared with studies that did not (χ² = 14.11, P = 0.0002, I² = 92.9%).

LIMITATIONS

We were unable to access 13 of 24 PtDAs. Conclusions. Greater attention to health literacy and socially-disadvantaged populations is needed in the field of PtDAs to ensure equity in decision support.

Improving Shared Decision Making in Latino Men With Prostate Cancer: A Thematic Analysis

Background. Multiple studies have shown that digitally mediated decision aids help prepare patients for medical decision making with their providers. However, few studies have investigated whether decision-support preferences differ between non-English-speaking and English-speaking Latino men with limited literacy. Objective. To identify and compare health information seeking patterns, preferences for information presentation, and interest in digital decision aids in a sample of Southern Californian underserved Latino men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer at a county hospital. Methods. We conducted semistructured, in-depth telephone interviews with 12 Spanish-speaking and 8 English-speaking Latino men using a purposive sampling technique. Following transcription of taped interviews, Spanish interviews were translated. Using a coding protocol developed by the team, two bilingual members jointly analyzed the transcripts for emerging themes. Coder agreement exceeded 80%. Differences were resolved through discussion. Results. Thematic differences between groups with different preferred languages emerged. Most respondents engaged in online health information seeking using cellphones, perceived a paternalistic patient-provider relationship, and expressed willingness to use hypothetical digital decision aids if recommended by their provider. English speakers reported higher digital technology proficiency for health-related searches. They also more frequently indicated family involvement in digital search related to their condition and preferred self-guided, web-based decision aids. In comparison, Spanish speakers reported lower digital technology proficiency and preferred family-involved, coach-guided, paper and visual decision aids. English speakers reported substantially higher levels of formal education. Conclusion. Preferences regarding the use of digital technology to inform prostate cancer treatment decision making among underserved Latino men varied depending on preferred primary language. Effective preparation of underserved Latino men for shared decision making requires consideration of alternative approaches depending on level of education attainment and preferred primary language.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness of decision aids for vaccination decision-making

BACKGROUND

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness of vaccination decision aids compared with usual care on vaccine uptake, vaccine attitudes, decisional conflict, intent to vaccinate and timeliness.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in OVID Medline, OVID Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library and SCOPUS. Randomised controlled trials were included if they evaluated the impact of decision aids as defined by the International Patient Decision Aids Standards Collaboration. Where possible, meta-analysis was undertaken. Where meta-analysis was not possible, we conducted a narrative synthesis. Risk of bias in included trials was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Data were analysed using STATA.

RESULTS

Five RCTs were identified that evaluated the effectiveness of decision aids in the context of vaccination decision making. Meta-analysis of four studies showed that decision aids may have slightly increased vaccination uptake, but this was reduced to no effect once studies with higher risk of bias were excluded. Meta-analysis of three studies showed that decision aids moderately increased intention to vaccinate. Narrative synthesis of two studies suggested that decision aids reduced decisional conflict. One study reported that decision aids decreased perceived risk of vaccination. Content, format and delivery method of the decision aids varied across the studies. It was not clear from the information reported whether these variations affected the effectiveness of the decision aids.

CONCLUSION

Decision aids can assist in vaccine decision making. Future studies of decision aids could provide greater detail of the decision aids themselves, which would enable comparison of the effectiveness of different elements and formats. Standardising decision aids would also allow for easier comparison between decision aids.

Framework to Support the Process of Decision-Making on Life-Sustaining Treatments in the ICU: Results of a Delphi Study

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

To develop a consensus framework that can guide the process of decision-making on continuing or limiting life-sustaining treatments in ICU patients, using evidence-based items, supported by caregivers, patients, and surrogate decision makers from multiple countries.

Development and Evaluation of a Prediabetes Decision Aid in Primary Care: Examining Patient-Reported Outcomes by Language Preference and Educational Attainment

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the development and preliminary effectiveness of a novel Prediabetes Decision Aid on adoption of intensive lifestyle interventions (ILIs) and metformin. Little research has focused on increasing uptake of these evidence-based treatments, especially among non-English speakers and those with low educational attainment.

METHODS

Investigators developed an English and Spanish decision aid displaying information about type 2 diabetes (T2DM) risk and treatments to prevent T2DM and prompting patients to identify next steps for management. This pilot study was a single-arm, pretest-posttest trial of 40 adult patients with prediabetes, obesity, and ≥1 office visit within the prior 12 months. Participants reviewed this tool briefly with a study team member, and data were collected on 3 coprimary outcomes: knowledge about T2DM risk, decisional conflict, and intention to adopt treatment. Exploratory outcomes included subsequent documentation of prediabetes in chart notes and adoption of ILIs or metformin.

RESULTS

Almost all participants were women, with nearly half expressing Spanish language preference and low educational attainment. A nonsignificant increase in knowledge was observed across all subgroups. Decisional conflict was significantly reduced from pretest to posttest and was similar between subgroups defined by language preference and educational attainment. While intention to adopt ILIs increased across all subgroups, this change was only significant among Spanish speakers and participants with low educational attainment. At 6 months, 17 participants had subsequent provider documentation of prediabetes, and 12 adopted ILIs or metformin.

CONCLUSIONS

The decision aid improved patient-reported outcomes and promoted treatment adoption in a diverse patient sample.

Are We Improving? Update and Critical Appraisal of the Reporting of Decision Process and Quality Measures in Trials Evaluating Patient Decision Aids

Background

In 2014, a systematic review found large gaps in the quality of reporting of measures used in 86 published trials evaluating the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs). The purpose of this study was to update that review.

Methods

We examined measures of decision making used in 49 randomized controlled trials included in the 2014 and 2017 Cochrane Collaboration systematic review of PtDAs. Data on development of the measures, reliability, validity, responsiveness, precision, interpretability, feasibility, and acceptability were independently abstracted by 2 paired reviewers.

Results

Information from 273 measures was abstracted, and 109 of these covered the core domains of decision processes (n = 55) and decision quality including informed choice/knowledge (n = 48) and values-choice concordance (n = 12). Very few studies reported data on the performance and clinical sensibility of measures, with reliability (23%) and validity (6%) being the most common. Studies using new measures were less likely to include information about their psychometric performance compared with previously published measures.

Limitations

The review was limited to reporting of measures in studies included in the Cochrane review and did not consult prior publications.

Conclusion

There continues to be very little reported about the development or performance of measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of PtDAs in published trials. Minimum reporting standards have been published, and efforts to require investigators to use them are needed.

A decision aid for additional findings in genomic sequencing: Development and pilot testing

OBJECTIVE

To describe the development of a web-based, patient-facing decision aid to support patients and research participants to make an informed, values-based decision about whether to receive additional results from genomic sequencing.

METHODS

We developed the decision aid following the multi-step process described in the International Patient Decision Aids Standards. This utilized literature review, focus groups, and alpha testing with research participants undergoing clinical genomic sequencing.

RESULTS

The decision aid, the Optional Results Choice Aid (ORCA), includes a seven-question "values clarification exercise," illustrative patient quotes, and summative guidance for the user. The decision aid was found to be highly readable, acceptable and relevant in alpha testing.

CONCLUSION

We developed a decision aid to support informed, values-based decision making for patients and research participants considering whether to receive additional results from genomic sequencing. ORCA is being implemented in the NHGRI-funded Cancer Health Assessment Reaching Many (CHARM) study, where we are measuring informed values-choice congruence.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

ORCA was designed to support patients and research participants to make an informed, values-based decision about whether to receive additional results from genomic sequencing.

Readmission, Complication, and Disposition Calculators in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systemic Review

BACKGROUND

Predictive tools are useful adjuncts in surgical planning. They help guide patient selection, candidacy for inpatient vs outpatient surgery, and discharge disposition as well as predict the probability of readmissions and complications after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Surgeons may find it difficult due to significant variation among risk calculators to decide which tool is best suited for a specific patient for optimal decision-based care. Our aim is to perform a systematic review of the literature to determine the existing post-TJA readmission calculators and compare the specific elements that comprise their formula. Second, we intend to evaluate the pros and cons of each calculator.

METHODS

Using a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols protocol, we conducted a systematic search through 3 major databases for publications addressing TJA risk stratification tools for readmission, discharge disposition, and early complications. We excluded those manuscripts that were not comprehensive for hips and knees, did not list discharge, readmission or complication as the primary outcome, or were published outside the North America.

RESULTS

Ten publications met our criteria and were compared on their sourced data, variable types, and overall algorithm quality. Seven of these were generated with single institution data and 3 from large administrative datasets. Three tools determined readmission risk, 5 calculated discharge disposition, and 2 predicted early complications. Only 4 prediction tools were validated by external studies. Seven studies utilized preoperative data points in their risk equations while 3 utilized intraoperative or postsurgical data to delineate risk.

CONCLUSION

The extensive variation among TJA risk calculators underscores the need for tools with more individualized stratification capabilities and verification. The transition to outpatient and same-day discharge TJA may preclude or change the need for many of these calculators. Further studies are needed to develop more streamlined risk calculator tools that predict readmission and surgical complications.

The Readability of Patient Education Materials Pertaining to Gastrointestinal Procedures

INTRODUCTION

Due to the ubiquity and ease of access of Internet, patients are able to access online health information more easily than ever. The American Medical Association recommends that patient education materials be targeted at or below the 6^th grade level in order to accommodate a wider audience. In this study, we evaluate the difficulty of educational materials pertaining to common GI procedures; we analyze on the readability of online education materials for colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD).

METHODS

Google search was performed using keywords of "colonoscopy," "sigmoidoscopy," and "EGD" with "patient information" at the end of each search term. The texts from a total of 18 studies, 6 for each of the procedures, were then saved. Each study was also subdivided into "Introduction," "Preparation," "Complications," and if available, "Alternatives." Furthermore, medical terminology that was properly explained, proper nouns, medication names, and other copyright text were removed in order to prevent inflation of the difficulty. Five validated readability tests were used to analyze each study and subsections: Coleman-Liau, New Dale-Chall, Flesch-Kincaid, Gunning Fog, SMOG.

RESULTS

Studies on colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and EGD had median readability grades of 9.7, 10.2, and 11.0, respectively. Analysis of the subsections revealed that the "Alternative" subsection was the most difficult to comprehend with a readability score of 11.4, whereas the "Introduction" subsection was the easiest to comprehend with a readability score of 9.5.

CONCLUSION

Despite modifications to the studies that improved the readability scores, patient education materials were still significantly above the recommended 6^th grade level across all websites. This study emphasizes that clear and simple language is warranted in order to create information that is suitable for most patients.

Development of a Decision Aid for Patients and Families Considering Hospice

Background: Hospice is underutilized. Miscommunication, decisional complexity, and misunderstanding around engaging hospice may contribute. Shared decision making (SDM), aided by patient decision aids (PtDAs), can improve knowledge and decision quality. Currently, there are no freely available hospice-specific PtDA to facilitate conversions between patients and providers about hospice care. Objective: To develop a theory-based and unbiased hospice specific PtDA. Design: Guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework and International Patient Decision Aid Standards, we used a theory-driven, eight-step, iterative, user-centered approach with multistakeholder input to develop a hospice-specific PtDA for anyone facing end-of-life decisions. Subjects: Feedback was obtained from a 10-member Patient Advisory Panel composed of lay patient advisors; focus groups of hospice providers, family caregivers, and patients; and the Palliative Care Research Group at University of Colorado Hospital consisting of palliative care physicians, midlevel providers, nurses, social workers, chaplains, and researchers. Results: There are many challenges in developing an unbiased hospice decision aid, including (1) balancing the provision of education (eligibility, payment) with decisional support, (2) clarifying values and incorporating emotion, (3) ideally representing the potential downsides of hospice, and (4) adequately capturing and describing care alternatives to hospice. Within this context, we developed a 12-page article and 17-minute video PtDAs. The PtDA openly acknowledges the emotional complexity of the decision and incorporates values clarification techniques to help decision makers reflect and evaluate their goals and preferences for end-of-life care. Conclusions: Hospice decision making is complex and emotional, demanding high-quality SDM aided by a formal PtDA. This work resulted in a freely available article and video PtDA for patients considering hospice. The effectiveness and implementation of these tools will be studied in future research. Clinical Trials Registration (NCT03794700 & NCT04458090).

Skills-based intervention to enhance collaborative decision-making: systematic adaptation and open trial protocol for veterans with psychosis

Background

Collaborative decision-making is an innovative decision-making approach that assigns equal power and responsibility to patients and providers. Most veterans with serious mental illnesses like schizophrenia want a greater role in treatment decisions, but there are no interventions targeted for this population. A skills-based intervention is promising because it is well-aligned with the recovery model, uses similar mechanisms as other evidence-based interventions in this population, and generalizes across decisional contexts while empowering veterans to decide when to initiate collaborative decision-making. Collaborative Decision Skills Training (CDST) was developed in a civilian serious mental illness sample and may fill this gap but needs to undergo a systematic adaptation process to ensure fit for veterans.

Methods

In aim 1, the IM Adapt systematic process will be used to adapt CDST for veterans with serious mental illness. Veterans and Veteran’s Affairs (VA) staff will join an Adaptation Resource Team and complete qualitative interviews to identify how elements of CDST or service delivery may need to be adapted to optimize its effectiveness or viability for veterans and the VA context. During aim 2, an open trial will be conducted with veterans in a VA Psychosocial Rehabilitation and Recovery Center (PRRC) to assess additional adaptations, feasibility, and initial evidence of effectiveness.

Discussion

This study will be the first to evaluate a collaborative decision-making intervention among veterans with serious mental illness. It will also contribute to the field’s understanding of perceptions of collaborative decision-making among veterans with serious mental illness and VA clinicians, and result in a service delivery manual that may be used to understand adaptation needs generally in VA PRRCs.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04324944

Evaluation of the literature surrounding shared decision-making in elective rhinological surgery: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

[1] review all studies utilizing SDM in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) [2], increase awareness of otolaryngologists to shared decision-making, and [3] provide a framework for its incorporation into research and clinical practice.

METHODS

systematic search was performed in November 2019 using PubMed/MEDLINE 1947-, CINAHL Complete 1937-, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Web of Science Core Collection (SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI, ESCI) 1900-. All databases were searched from their inception through the date of search. Studies were eligible if they involved a discussion of SDM in the management of CRS. Studies were excluded if they lacked original patient data or outcomes of interest. Identified studies were screened by title/abstract, followed by full-text review. PRISMA guidelines were strictly followed.

RESULTS

in total, 416 articles met screening criteria. Six were eligible for full text review. Only one study - an expert panel of the framework for the presurgical treatment of CRS - pertained to SDM. While this study mentions that SDM is a critically important piece to optimize care quality, it does not directly investigate the effects of SDM in CRS.

CONCLUSION

this review represents a significant negative study that identifies a clear gap in the rhinology literature. Despite the recognized importance of SDM, there have been no interventional studies in the literature to investigate SDM in CRS. This review highlights the need for exploring the role of SDM in rhinological surgery, outlines an overview of SDM and its impact on patient outcomes, and provides a proposed framework for incorporating SDM in research and clinical practice.