Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

Community Pharmacists' Perspectives of a Decision Aid for Managing Type 2 Diabetes in Ontario

OBJECTIVES

Decision aids are tools designed to help patients make choices about their health care. We explored pharmacists' perceptions of an evidence-based diabetes decision aid developed by the Mayo Clinic, Diabetes Medication Choice (DMC). Using DMC as a reference, we aimed to explore pharmacists' perspectives on decision aids, their place in a community pharmacy setting and the implementing of a decision aid, such as DMC, in Ontario.

METHODS

We used semistructured interviews with a convenience sample of community pharmacists from Ontario. We applied a thematic analysis to the data.

RESULTS

We conducted 16 interviews with pharmacists, of whom 9 were certified diabetes educators, and 10 were female. Three themes emerged from the data: pharmacists' knowledge and awareness of decision aids; pharmacists' perceptions of the DMC decision aids, and implementation of the DMC decision aids in Ontario pharmacies. Participants discussed their limited experience with and training in the use of decision aids. Although many participants agreed that the DMC decision aids may contribute to patient-centred care, all agreed that significant changes were needed to be made to implement this tool in practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacists felt that the use of decision aids in community pharmacies in Ontario may improve patient-centred care. Modifications, however, are needed to improve the applicability to their context and fit into their workflow. Empirical data concerning the impact of decision aids in community pharmacy is needed.

Shared decision-making for psychiatric medication: A mixed-methods evaluation of a UK training programme for service users and clinicians

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is recognised as a promising strategy to enhance good collaboration between clinicians and service users, yet it is not practised regularly in mental health.

AIMS

Develop and evaluate a novel training programme to enhance SDM in psychiatric medication management for service users, psychiatrists and care co-ordinators.

METHODS

The training programme design was informed by existing literature and local stakeholders consultations. Parallel group-based training programmes on SDM process were delivered to community mental health service users and providers. Evaluation consisted of quantitative measures at baseline and 12-month follow-up, post-programme participant feedback and qualitative interviews.

RESULTS

Training was provided to 47 service users, 35 care-coordinators and 12 psychiatrists. Participant feedback was generally positive. Statistically significant changes in service users' decisional conflict and perceptions of practitioners' interactional style in promoting SDM occurred at the follow-up. Qualitative data suggested positive impacts on service users' and care co-ordinators confidence to explore medication experience, and group-based training was valued.

CONCLUSIONS

The programme was generally acceptable to service users and practitioners. This indicates the value of conducting a larger study and exploring application for non-medical decisions.

Men's perspectives of prostate cancer screening: A systematic review of qualitative studies

Background

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed non-skin cancer in men. Screening for prostate cancer is widely accepted; however concerns regarding the harms outweighing the benefits of screening exist. Although patient’s play a pivotal role in the decision making process, men may not be aware of the controversies regarding prostate cancer screening. Therefore we aimed to describe men’s attitudes, beliefs and experiences of prostate cancer screening.

Methods

Systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies on men’s perspectives of prostate cancer screening. Electronic databases and reference lists were searched to October 2016.

Findings

Sixty studies involving 3,029 men aged from 18–89 years, who had been screened for prostate cancer by Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) or Digital Rectal Examination (DRE) and not screened, across eight countries were included. Five themes were identified: Social prompting (trusting professional opinion, motivation from family and friends, proximity and prominence of cancer); gaining decisional confidence (overcoming fears, survival imperative, peace of mind, mental preparation, prioritising wellbeing); preserving masculinity (bodily invasion, losing sexuality, threatening manhood, medical avoidance); avoiding the unknown and uncertainties (taboo of cancer-related death, lacking tangible cause, physiological and symptomatic obscurity, ambiguity of the procedure, confusing controversies); and prohibitive costs.

Conclusions

Men are willing to participate in prostate cancer screening to prevent cancer and gain reassurance about their health, particularly when supported or prompted by their social networks or healthcare providers. However, to do so they needed to mentally overcome fears of losing their masculinity and accept the intrusiveness of screening, the ambiguities about the necessity and the potential for substantial costs. Addressing the concerns and priorities of men may facilitate informed decisions about prostate cancer screening and improve patient satisfaction and outcomes.

Barriers and facilitators to orthopaedic surgeons' uptake of decision aids for total knee arthroplasty: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

The demand for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is increasing. Differentiating who will derive a clinically meaningful improvement from TKA from others is a key challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. Decision aids can help surgeons select appropriate candidates for surgery, but their uptake has been low. The aim of this study was to explore the barriers and facilitators to decision aid uptake among orthopaedic surgeons.

DESIGN

A qualitative study involving face-to-face interviews. Questions were constructed on the Theoretical Domains Framework to systematically explore barriers and facilitators.

SETTING

One tertiary hospital in Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty orthopaedic surgeons performing TKA.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Beliefs underlying similar interview responses were identified and grouped together as themes describing relevant barriers and facilitators to uptake of decision aids.

RESULTS

While prioritising their clinical acumen, surgeons believed a decision aid could enhance communication and patient informed consent. Barriers identified included the perception that one's patient outcomes were already optimal; a perceived lack of non-operative alternatives for the management of end-stage osteoarthritis, concerns about mandatory cut-offs for patient-centred care and concerns about the medicolegal implications of using a decision aid.

CONCLUSIONS

Multifaceted implementation interventions are required to ensure that orthopaedic surgeons are ready, willing and able to use a TKA decision aid. Audit/feedback to address current decision-making biases such as overconfidence may enhance readiness to uptake. Policy changes and/or incentives may enhance willingness to uptake. Finally, the design/implementation of effective non-operative treatments may enhance ability to uptake by ensuring that surgeons have the resources they need to carry out decisions.

Association of Decision-making with Patients' Perceptions of Care and Knowledge during Longitudinal Pulmonary Nodule Surveillance

RATIONALE

Patient participation in medical decision-making is widely advocated, but outcomes are inconsistent.

OBJECTIVES

We examined the associations between medical decision-making roles, and patients' perceptions of their care and knowledge while undergoing pulmonary nodule surveillance.

METHODS

The study setting was an academically affiliated Veterans Affairs hospital network in which 121 participants had 319 decision-making encounters. The Control Preferences Scale was used to assess patients' decision-making roles. Associations between decision-making, including role concordance (i.e., agreement between patients' preferred and actual roles), shared decision-making (SDM), and perceptions of care and knowledge, were assessed using logistic regression and generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

Participants had a preferred role in 98% of encounters, and most desired an active role (shared or patient controlled). For some encounters (36%), patients did not report their actual decision-making role, because they did not know what their role was. Role concordance and SDM occurred in 56% and 26% of encounters, respectively. Role concordance was associated with greater satisfaction with medical care (adjusted odds ratio [Adj-OR], 5.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.68-17.26), higher quality of patient-reported care (Adj-OR, 2.86; 95% CI, 1.31-6.27), and more disagreement that care could be better (Adj-OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.12-4.16). Role concordance was not associated with improved pulmonary nodule knowledge with respect to lung cancer risk (Adj-OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.63-2.00) or nodule information received (Adj-OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.31-4.13). SDM was not associated with perceptions of care or knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing longitudinal nodule surveillance, a majority had a preference for having active roles in decision-making. Interestingly, during some encounters, patients did not know what their role was or that a decision was being made. Role concordance was associated with greater patient-reported satisfaction and quality of medical care, but not with improved knowledge. Patient participation in decision-making may influence perceptions of care; however, clinicians may need to focus on other communication strategies or domains to improve patient knowledge and health outcomes.

Online, Interactive Option Grid Patient Decision Aids and their Effect on User Preferences

Background. Randomized trials have shown that patient decision aids can modify users’ preferred healthcare options, but research has yet to identify the attributes embedded in these tools that cause preferences to shift. Objectives. The aim of this study was to investigate people’s preferences as they used decision aids for 5 health decisions and, for each of the following: 1) determine if using the interactive Option Grid led to a pre–post shift in preferences; 2) determine which frequently asked questions (FAQs) led to preference shifts; 3) determine the FAQs that were rated as the most important as users compared options. Methods. Interactive Option Grid decision aids enable users to view attributes of available treatment or screening options, rate their importance, and specify their preferred options before and after decision aid use. The McNemar–Bowker paired test was used to compare stated pre–post preferences. Multinomial logistic regressions were conducted to investigate possible associations between covariates and preference shifts. Results. Overall, 626 users completed the 5 most-used tools: 1) Amniocentesis test: yes or no? ( n = 73); 2) Angina: treatment options ( n = 88); 3) Breast cancer: surgical options ( n = 265); 4) Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) test: yes or no? ( n = 82); 5) Statins for heart disease risk: yes or no? ( n = 118). The breast cancer, PSA, and statins Option Grid decision aids generated significant preference shifts. Generally, users shifted their preference when presented with the description of the available treatment options, and the risk associated with each option. Conclusion. The use of decision aids for some, but not all health decisions, was accompanied by a shift in user preferences. Users typically valued information associated with risks, and chose more risk averse options after completing the interactive tool.

ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/STS 2017 Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease : A Report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons

The American College of Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and American Association for Thoracic Surgery, along with key specialty and subspecialty societies, have completed a 2-part revision of the appropriate use criteria (AUC) for coronary revascularization. In prior coronary revascularization AUC documents, indications for revascularization in acute coronary syndromes and stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) were combined into 1 document. To address the expanding clinical indications for coronary revascularization, and to align the subject matter with the most current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines, the new AUC for coronary artery revascularization were separated into 2 documents addressing SIHD and acute coronary syndromes individually. This document presents the AUC for SIHD.Clinical scenarios were developed to mimic patient presentations encountered in everyday practice. These scenarios included information on symptom status; risk level as assessed by noninvasive testing; coronary disease burden; and, in some scenarios, fractional flow reserve testing, presence or absence of diabetes, and SYNTAX score. This update provides a reassessment of clinical scenarios that the writing group felt were affected by significant changes in the medical literature or gaps from prior criteria. The methodology used in this update is similar to the initial document but employs the recent modifications in the methods for developing AUC, most notably, alterations in the nomenclature for appropriate use categorization.A separate, independent rating panel scored the clinical scenarios on a scale of 1 to 9. Scores of 7 to 9 indicate that revascularization is considered appropriate for the clinical scenario presented. Scores of 1 to 3 indicate that revascularization is considered rarely appropriate for the clinical scenario, whereas scores in the mid-range of 4 to 6 indicate that coronary revascularization may be appropriate for the clinical scenario.As seen with the prior coronary revascularization AUC, revascularization in clinical scenarios with high symptom burden, high-risk features, and high coronary disease burden, as well as in patients receiving antianginal therapy, are deemed appropriate. Additionally, scenarios assessing the appropriateness of revascularization before kidney transplantation or transcatheter valve therapy are now rated. The primary objective of the AUC is to provide a framework for the assessment of practice patterns that will hopefully improve physician decision making.

Living with Crohn's disease: an exploratory cross-sectional qualitative study into decision-making and expectations in relation to autologous haematopoietic stem cell treatment (the DECIDES study)

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Severe Crohn's disease impacts negatively on individual quality of life, with treatment options limited once conventional therapies have been exhausted. The aim of this study was to explore factors influencing decision-making and expectations of people considering or participating in the Autologous Haematopoietic Stem Cell Treatment trial.

METHODS

An international, cross-sectional qualitative study, involving semistructured face to face interviews across five sites (four UK and one Spain). 38 participants were interviewed (13 men, 25 women; age range 23-67 years; mean age 37 years). The mean age at diagnosis was 20 years. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim and transcripts were analysed using a framework approach.

RESULTS

Four themes emerged from the analysis: (1) 'making your mind up'-a determination to receive stem cell treatment despite potential risks; (2) communicating and understanding risks and benefits; (3) non-participation-your choice or mine? (4) recovery and reframing of personal expectations.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision-making and expectations of people with severe Crohn's disease in relation to autologous haematopoietic stem cell treatment is a complex process influenced by participants' histories of battling with their condition, a frequent willingness to consider novel treatment options despite potential risks and, in some cases, a raised level of expectation about the benefits of trial participation. Discussions with patients who are considering novel treatments should take into account potential 'therapeutic misestimation', thereby enhancing shared decision-making, informed consent and the communication with those deemed non-eligible.

ASTIC TRIAL EUDRACT NUMBER

2005-003337-40: results.

Decision aids for second-line palliative chemotherapy: a randomised phase II multicentre trial

BACKGROUND

There is increasing recognition of the delicate balance between the modest benefits of palliative chemotherapy and the burden of treatment. Decision aids (DAs) can potentially help patients with advanced cancer with these difficult treatment decisions, but providing detailed information could have an adverse impact on patients' well-being. The objective of this randomised phase II study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DAs for patients with advanced cancer considering second-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with advanced breast or colorectal cancer considering second-line treatment were randomly assigned to usual care (control group) or usual care plus a DA (intervention group) in a 1:2 ratio. A nurse offered a DA with information on adverse events, tumour response and survival. Outcome measures included patient-reported well-being (primary outcome: anxiety) and quality of the decision-making process and the resulting choice.

RESULTS

Of 128 patients randomised, 45 were assigned to the control group and 83 to the intervention group. Median age was 62 years (range 32-81), 63% were female, and 73% had colorectal cancer. The large majority of patients preferred treatment with chemotherapy (87%) and subsequently commenced treatment with chemotherapy (86%). No adverse impact on patients' well-being was found and nurses reported that consultations in which the DAs were offered went well. Being offered the DA was associated with stronger treatment preferences (3.0 vs. 2.5; p=0.030) and increased subjective knowledge (6.7 vs. 6.3; p=0.022). Objective knowledge, risk perception and perceived involvement were comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

DAs containing detailed risk information on second-line palliative treatment could be delivered to patients with advanced cancer without having an adverse impact on patient well-being. Surprisingly, the DAs only marginally improved the quality of the decision-making process. The effectiveness of DAs for palliative treatment decisions needs further exploration.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Registry (NTR): NTR1113 (registered on 2 November 2007).

Effect of a Mobile Web App on Kidney Transplant Candidates' Knowledge About Increased Risk Donor Kidneys: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplant candidates (KTCs) must provide informed consent to accept kidneys from increased risk donors (IRD), but poorly understand them. We conducted a multisite, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of a mobile Web application, Inform Me, for increasing knowledge about IRDs.

METHODS

Kidney transplant candidates undergoing transplant evaluation at 2 transplant centers were randomized to use Inform Me after routine transplant education (intervention) or routine transplant education alone (control). Computer adaptive learning method reinforced learning by embedding educational material, and initial (test 1) and additional test questions (test 2) into each chapter. Knowledge (primary outcome) was assessed in person after education (tests 1 and 2), and 1 week later by telephone (test 3). Controls did not receive test 2. Willingness to accept an IRD kidney (secondary outcome) was assessed after tests 1 and 3. Linear regression test 1 knowledge scores were used to test the significance of Inform Me exposure after controlling for covariates. Multiple imputation was used for intention-to-treat analysis.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty-eight KTCs participated. Intervention participants had higher test 1 knowledge scores (mean difference, 6.61; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 5.37-7.86) than control participants, representing a 44% higher score than control participants' scores. Intervention participants' knowledge scores increased with educational reinforcement (test 2) compared with control arm test 1 scores (mean difference, 9.50; 95% CI, 8.27-10.73). After 1 week, intervention participants' knowledge remained greater than controls' knowledge (mean difference, 3.63; 95% CI, 2.49-4.78) (test 3). Willingness to accept an IRD kidney did not differ between study arms at tests 1 and 3.

CONCLUSIONS

Inform Me use was associated with greater KTC knowledge about IRD kidneys above routine transplant education alone.

Using the New CellCollector to Capture Circulating Tumor Cells from Blood in Different Groups of Pulmonary Disease: A Cohort Study

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are promising biomarkers for clinical application. Cancer screening with Low-Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) and CTC detections in pulmonary nodule patients has never been reported. The aim of this study was to explore the effectiveness of the combined methods to screen lung cancer. Out of 8313 volunteers screened by LDCT, 32 ground-glass nodules (GGNs) patients and 19 healthy volunteers were randomly selected. Meanwhile, 15 lung cancer patients also enrolled. CellCollector, a new CTC capturing device, was applied for CTCs detection. In GGNs group, five CTC positive patients with six CTCs were identified, 15.6% were positive (range, 1–2). In lung cancer group, 73.3% of the analyzed CellCollector cells were positive (range, 1–7) and no “CTC-like” events were detected in healthy group. All CTCs detected from GGNs group were isolated from the CellCollector functional domain and determined by whole genomic amplification for next-generation sequencing(NGS) analysis. NGS data showed that three cancer-related genes contained mutations in five CTC positive patients, including KIT, SMARCB1 and TP53 genes. In four patients, 16 mutation genes existed. Therefore, LDCT combined with CTC analysis by an in vivo device in high-risk pulmonary nodule patients was a promising way to screen early stage lung cancer.

Models of Care for addressing chronic musculoskeletal pain and health in children and adolescents

Chronic musculoskeletal pain among children and adolescents is common and can negatively affect quality of life. It also represents a high burden on the health system. Effective models of care for addressing the prevention and management of pediatric musculoskeletal pain are imperative. This chapter will address the following key questions: (1) Why are pediatric-specific models of pain care needed? (2) What is the burden of chronic musculoskeletal pain among children and adolescents? (3) What are the best practice approaches for early identification and prevention of chronic musculoskeletal pain in children and adolescents? (4) What are the recommended strategies for clinical management of chronic pain, including pharmacological, physical, psychological and complementary, and alternative approaches? (5) What are the most effective strategies for implementing models of pain care across different care settings? (6) What are the research priorities to improve models of care for children and adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain?

Comparative Effectiveness of Clinical-Community Childhood Obesity Interventions: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Novel approaches to care delivery that leverage clinical and community resources could improve body mass index (BMI) and family-centered outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the extent to which 2 clinical-community interventions improved child BMI z score and health-related quality of life, as well as parental resource empowerment in the Connect for Health Trial.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This 2-arm, blinded, randomized clinical trial was conducted from June 2014 through March 2016, with measures at baseline and 1 year after randomization. This intent-to-treat analysis included 721 children ages 2 to 12 years with BMI in the 85th or greater percentile from 6 primary care practices in Massachusetts.

INTERVENTIONS

Children were randomized to 1 of 2 arms: (1) enhanced primary care (eg, flagging of children with BMI ≥ 85th percentile, clinical decision support tools for pediatric weight management, parent educational materials, a Neighborhood Resource Guide, and monthly text messages) or (2) enhanced primary care plus contextually tailored, individual health coaching (twice-weekly text messages and telephone or video contacts every other month) to support behavior change and linkage of families to neighborhood resources.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

One-year changes in age- and sex-specific BMI z score, child health-related quality of life measured by the Pediatric Quality of Life 4.0, and parental resource empowerment.

RESULTS

At 1 year, we obtained BMI z scores from 664 children (92%) and family-centered outcomes from 657 parents (91%). The baseline mean (SD) age was 8.0 (3.0) years; 35% were white (n = 252), 33.3% were black (n = 240), 21.8% were Hispanic (n = 157), and 9.9% were of another race/ethnicity (n = 71). In the enhanced primary care group, adjusted mean (SD) BMI z score was 1.91 (0.56) at baseline and 1.85 (0.58) at 1 year, an improvement of -0.06 BMI z score units (95% CI, -0.10 to -0.02) from baseline to 1 year. In the enhanced primary care plus coaching group, the adjusted mean (SD) BMI z score was 1.87 (0.56) at baseline and 1.79 (0.58) at 1 year, an improvement of -0.09 BMI z score units (95% CI, -0.13 to -0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the 2 intervention arms (difference, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.03; P = .39). Both intervention arms led to improved parental resource empowerment: 0.29 units (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.35) higher in the enhanced primary care group and 0.22 units (95% CI, 0.15 to 0.28) higher in the enhanced primary care plus coaching group. Parents in the enhanced primary care plus coaching group, but not in the enhanced care alone group, reported improvements in their child's health-related quality of life (1.53 units; 95% CI, 0.51 to 2.56). However, there were no significant differences between the intervention arms in either parental resource empowerment (0.07 units; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.16) or child health-related quality of life (0.89 units; 95% CI, -0.56 to 2.33).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Two interventions that included a package of high-quality clinical care for obesity and linkages to community resources resulted in improved family-centered outcomes for childhood obesity and improvements in child BMI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02124460.

Incorporating Patients' Social Determinants of Health into Hypertension and Depression Care: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

The objective of this study was to carry out a randomized controlled pilot trial to test the effectiveness of an integrated intervention for hypertension and depression incorporating patients' social determinants of health (enhanced intervention) versus an integrated intervention alone (basic intervention). In all, 54 patients were randomized. An electronic monitor was used to measure blood pressure, and the nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) assessed depressive symptoms. Patients in the enhanced intervention had a significantly improved PHQ-9 mean change from baseline in comparison with patients in the basic intervention group at 12 weeks (p = 0.024). Patients in the enhanced intervention had a significantly improved systolic and diastolic blood pressure mean change from baseline in comparison with patients in the basic intervention group at 12 weeks (p = 0.003 and p = 0.019, respectively). Our pilot trial results indicate integrated care management that addresses the social determinants of health for patients with hypertension and depression may be effective.

Hospital staffs' perceptions of an electronic program to engage patients in nutrition care at the bedside: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Advancements in technology are enabling patients to participate in their health care through self-monitoring and self-management of diet, exercise and chronic disease. Technologies allowing patients to participate in hospital care are still emerging but show promise. Our team is developing a program by which hospitalised patients can participate in their nutrition care. This study explores hospital staffs' perceptions of using this technology to engage patients in their care.

METHODS

This qualitative study involved semi-structured interviews with hospital staff providing routine nutrition care to patients (i.e. dietitians, nutrition assistants, nurses, doctors and foodservice staff) from five wards at a tertiary metropolitan teaching hospital in Australia. The hospital currently uses an electronic foodservice system (EFS) for patient meal ordering, accessed through personal screens at the bedside. Participants were shown the EFS program on an iPad and asked about their perceptions of the program, with questions from a semi-structured interview guide. Staff were interviewed individually or in small focus groups. Interviews lasted 15-30 min and were audio recorded and later transcribed. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Nineteen staff participated in interviews. Overall, they expressed positive views of the EFS program and wanted it to be implemented in practice. Their responses formed three themes, each with a number of subthemes: 1) Enacting patient participation in practice; 2) Optimising nutrition care; and 3) Considerations for implementing an EFS program in practice. Staff thought the program would improve various aspects of nutrition care and enable patient participation in care. Whilst they raised some concerns, they focused on overcoming barriers and facilitating implementation if the program were to be adopted into practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Staff found an EFS program designed to engage patients in their nutrition care acceptable, as they saw benefits to using it for both patients and staff. Staff recognised characteristics of the program itself, as well as allocation of roles and responsibilities in operationalising it, were pivotal for successful implementation in practice. Their perspectives will inform program and intervention design, and implementation and evaluation strategies.

Levers for addressing medical underuse and overuse: achieving high-value health care

The preceding papers in this Series have outlined how underuse and overuse of health-care services occur within a complex system of health-care production, with a multiplicity of causes. Because poor care is ubiquitous and has considerable consequences for the health and wellbeing of billions of people around the world, remedying this problem is a morally and politically urgent task. Universal health coverage is a key step towards achieving the right care. Therefore, full consideration of potential levers of change must include an upstream perspective-ie, an understanding of the system-level factors that drive overuse and underuse, as well as the various incentives at work during a clinical encounter. One example of a system-level factor is the allocation of resources (eg, hospital beds and clinicians) to meet the needs of a local population to minimise underuse or overuse. Another example is priority setting using tools such as health technology assessment to guide the optimum diffusion of safe, effective, and cost-effective health-care services. In this Series paper we investigate a range of levers for eliminating medical underuse and overuse. Some levers could operate effectively (and be politically viable) across many different health and political systems (eg, increase patient activation with decision support) whereas other levers must be tailored to local contexts (eg, basing coverage decisions on a particular cost-effectiveness ratio). Ideally, policies must move beyond the purely incremental; that is, policies that merely tinker at the policy edges after underuse or overuse arises. In this regard, efforts to increase public awareness, mobilisation, and empowerment hold promise as universal methods to reset all other contexts and thereby enhance all other efforts to promote the right care.

Sharing Annotated Audio Recordings of Clinic Visits With Patients-Development of the Open Recording Automated Logging System (ORALS): Study Protocol

Background

Providing patients with recordings of their clinic visits enhances patient and family engagement, yet few organizations routinely offer recordings. Challenges exist for organizations and patients, including data safety and navigating lengthy recordings. A secure system that allows patients to easily navigate recordings may be a solution.

Objective

The aim of this project is to develop and test an interoperable system to facilitate routine recording, the Open Recording Automated Logging System (ORALS), with the aim of increasing patient and family engagement. ORALS will consist of (1) technically proficient software using automated machine learning technology to enable accurate and automatic tagging of in-clinic audio recordings (tagging involves identifying elements of the clinic visit most important to patients [eg, treatment plan] on the recording) and (2) a secure, easy-to-use Web interface enabling the upload and accurate linkage of recordings to patients, which can be accessed at home.

Methods

We will use a mixed methods approach to develop and formatively test ORALS in 4 iterative stages: case study of pioneer clinics where recordings are currently offered to patients, ORALS design and user experience testing, ORALS software and user interface development, and rapid cycle testing of ORALS in a primary care clinic, assessing impact on patient and family engagement. Dartmouth’s Informatics Collaboratory for Design, Development and Dissemination team, patients, patient partners, caregivers, and clinicians will assist in developing ORALS.

Results

We will implement a publication plan that includes a final project report and articles for peer-reviewed journals. In addition to this work, we will regularly report on our progress using popular relevant Tweet chats and online using our website, www.openrecordings.org. We will disseminate our work at relevant conferences (eg, Academy Health, Health Datapalooza, and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Quality Forums). Finally, Iora Health, a US-wide network of primary care practices (www.iorahealth.com), has indicated a willingness to implement ORALS on a larger scale upon completion of this development project.

Conclusions

Upon the completion of this project we will have developed a novel recording system that will be ready for large-scale testing. Our long-term goal is for ORALS to seamlessly fit into a clinic’s and patient’s daily routine, increasing levels of patient engagement and transparency of care.

Using CollaboRATE, a brief patient-reported measure of shared decision making: Results from three clinical settings in the United States

Introduction

CollaboRATE is a brief patient survey focused on shared decision making. This paper aims to (i) provide insight on facilitators and challenges to implementing a real‐time patient survey and (ii) evaluate CollaboRATE scores and response rates across multiple clinical settings with varied patient populations.

Method

All adult patients at three United States primary care practices were eligible to complete CollaboRATE post‐visit. To inform key learnings, we aggregated all mentions of unanticipated decisions, problems and administration errors from field notes and email communications. Mixed‐effects logistic regression evaluated the impact of site, clinician, patient age and patient gender on the CollaboRATE score.

Results

While CollaboRATE score increased only slightly with increasing patient age (OR 1.018, 95% CI 1.014‐1.021), female patient gender was associated with significantly higher CollaboRATE scores (OR 1.224, 95% CI 1.073‐1.397). Clinician also predicts CollaboRATE score (random effect variance 0.146). Site‐specific factors such as clinical workflow and checkout procedures play a key role in successful in‐clinic implementation and are significantly related to CollaboRATE scores, with Site 3 scoring significantly higher than Site 1 (OR 1.759, 95% CI 1.216 to 2.545) or Site 2 (z=−2.71, 95% CI −1.114 to −0.178).

Discussion

This study demonstrates that CollaboRATE can be used in diverse primary care settings. A clinic's workflow plays a crucial role in implementation. Patient experience measurement risks becoming a burden to both patients and administrators. Episodic use of short measurement tools could reduce this burden.

Assessing the impact of colonoscopy complications on use of colonoscopy among primary care physicians and other connected physicians: an observational study of older Americans

OBJECTIVES

Psychological biases can distort treatment decision-making. The availability heuristic is one such bias, wherein events that are recent, vivid or easily imagined are readily 'available' to memory and are therefore judged more likely to occur than expected based on epidemiological data. We assessed if the occurrence of a serious colonoscopy complication for a primary care physician's patient influenced colonoscopy rates for the physician's other patients.

DESIGN

Longitudinal study with time-varying exposure variables.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Individuals living in 51 hospital referral regions across the USA identified based on enrolment in fee-for-service Medicare during 2005-2010. We assigned patients to a primary care physician based on office visits during the prior 2 years.

EXPOSURES

For each physician in each month, we calculated the proportion of patients assigned to them who had a colonoscopy. We identified two serious complications of which the primary care provider would very likely be aware: gastrointestinal bleed or perforation leading to hospitalisation or death within 14 days of colonoscopy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We employed Poisson regression models including physician fixed effects to assess the change in number of colonoscopies in the four quarters following an adverse colonoscopy event.

RESULTS

We identified 5 360 191 patients assigned to 30 704 physicians. 4864 physicians (16%) had at least one patient with an adverse event. The estimated change in the quarterly number of colonoscopies among physicians' patients was significantly lower in quarter 2 following an adverse colonoscopy event (change=-2.1% (95% CI -3.4 to -0.8%)), before returning to the rate expected in the absence of an adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

Having a patient experience a serious adverse colonoscopy event was associated with a small and temporary decline in colonoscopy rates among a physician's other patients. This finding provides empirical evidence for the influence of notable adverse events on care, possibly due to the availability heuristic.

Personalised informed choice on evidence and controversy on mammography screening: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

In Italy women aged 50–69 are invited for a population-based breast cancer (BC) screening. Physicians, policy makers and patients associations agree on the need to inform women about the benefits and harms in order to permit an informed decision. Decision aids (DA) are an effective way to support people in their decisions about health. This trial aims to assess women’s informed choices, according to their health literacy and values, on participating or not in BC screening for the first time. Benefits, harms and controversies are presented.

Methods/design

The impact of the DA will be evaluated in a randomized controlled trial with a two-week follow-up. Women will be randomized via web to DA or a standard brochure. We will invite 8160 women, to obtain a final sample of 816 women. The primary outcome will be informed choice, measured on the basis of knowledge, attitudes and intentions on BC screening. Secondary outcomes are participation rate, satisfaction on information and decisional conflict.

Discussion

The web DA will be open-source and implemented on BC screenings and its efficacy for increasing informed choice will be tested. This model could be applied to other healthcare settings, cancer screenings, and public health programs.

Trial registration

The protocol for this trial was registered with the Clinicaltrials.gov registry on March 16, 2017: NCT03097653.

Strategies for Appropriate Patient-centered Care to Decrease the Nationwide Cost of Cancers in Korea

In terms of years of life lost to premature mortality, cancer imposes the highest burden in Korea. In order to reduce the burden of cancer, the Korean government has implemented cancer control programs aiming to reduce cancer incidence, to increase survival rates, and to decrease cancer mortality. However, these programs may paradoxically increase the cost burden. For examples, a cancer screening program for early detection could bring about over-diagnosis and over-treatment, and supplying medical services in a paternalistic manner could lead to defensive medicine or futile care. As a practical measure to reduce the cost burden of cancer, appropriate cancer care should be established. Ensuring appropriateness requires patient-doctor communication to ensure that utility values are shared and that autonomous decisions are made regarding medical services. Thus, strategies for reducing the cost burden of cancer through ensuring appropriate patient-centered care include introducing value-based medicine, conducting cost-utility studies, and developing patient decision aids.

Shared decision-making in stroke: an evolving approach to improved patient care

Shared decision-making (SDM) occurs when patients, families and clinicians consider patients' values and preferences alongside the best medical evidence and partner to make the best decision for a given patient in a specific scenario. SDM is increasingly promoted within Western contexts and is also being explored outside such settings, including in China. SDM and tools to promote SDM can improve patients' knowledge/understanding, participation in the decision-making process, satisfaction and trust in the healthcare team. SDM has also proposed long-term benefits to patients, clinicians, organisations and healthcare systems. To successfully perform SDM, clinicians must know their patients' values and goals and the evidence underlying different diagnostic and treatment options. This is relevant for decisions throughout stroke care, from thrombolysis to goals of care, diagnostic assessments, rehabilitation strategies, and secondary stroke prevention. Various physician, patient, family, cultural and system barriers to SDM exist. Strategies to overcome these barriers and facilitate SDM include clinician motivation, patient participation, adequate time and tools to support the process, such as decision aids. Although research about SDM in stroke care is lacking, decision aids are available for select decisions, such as anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Future research is needed regarding both cultural aspects of successful SDM and application of SDM to stroke-specific contexts.

Navigating high-risk surgery: protocol for a multisite, stepped wedge, cluster-randomised trial of a question prompt list intervention to empower older adults to ask questions that inform treatment decisions

INTRODUCTION

Older patients frequently undergo operations that carry high risk for postoperative complications and death. Poor preoperative communication between patients and surgeons can lead to uninformed decisions and result in unexpected outcomes, conflict between surgeons and patients, and treatment inconsistent with patient preferences. This article describes the protocol for a multisite, cluster-randomised trial that uses a stepped wedge design to test a patient-driven question prompt list (QPL) intervention aimed to improve preoperative decision making and inform postoperative expectations.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute-funded trial will be conducted at five academic medical centres in the USA. Study participants include surgeons who routinely perform vascular or oncological surgery, their patients and families. We aim to enrol 40 surgeons and 480 patients over 24 months. Patients age 65 or older who see a study-enrolled surgeon to discuss a vascular or oncological problem that could be treated with high-risk surgery will be enrolled at their clinic visit. Together with stakeholders, we developed a QPL intervention addressing preoperative communication needs of patients considering major surgery. Guided by the theories of self-determination and relational autonomy, this intervention is designed to increase patient activation. Patients will receive the QPL brochure and a letter from their surgeon encouraging its use. Using audio recordings of the outpatient surgical consultation, patient and family member questionnaires administered at three time points and retrospective chart review, we will compare the effectiveness of the QPL intervention to usual care with respect to the following primary outcomes: patient engagement in decision making, psychological well-being and post-treatment regret for patients and families, and interpersonal and intrapersonal conflict relating to treatment decisions and treatments received.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approvals have been granted by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Wisconsin and at each participating site, and a Certificate of Confidentiality has been obtained. Results will be reported in peer-reviewed publications and presented at national meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02623335.

Bringing a humanistic approach to cancer clinical trials

In this article, we describe some practical aspects that promote the humanisation of clinical research. Actions are not limited to improving the communication skills of medical staff but also include maintenance of care continuity, accessible written information, and application of theoretic models such as shared decision-making and management of stress in decision-making under uncertainty. We believe that a comprehensive strategy will increase patients' motivation to participate in and adhere to clinical research.

Measuring ability to assess claims about treatment effects: the development of the 'Claim Evaluation Tools'

OBJECTIVES

To describe the development of the Claim Evaluation Tools, a set of flexible items to measure people's ability to assess claims about treatment effects.

SETTING

Methodologists and members of the community (including children) in Uganda, Rwanda, Kenya, Norway, the UK and Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

In the iterative development of the items, we used purposeful sampling of people with training in research methodology, such as teachers of evidence-based medicine, as well as patients and members of the public from low-income and high-income countries. Development consisted of 4 processes: (1) determining the scope of the Claim Evaluation Tools and development of items; (2) expert item review and feedback (n=63); (3) cognitive interviews with children and adult end-users (n=109); and (4) piloting and administrative tests (n=956).

RESULTS

The Claim Evaluation Tools database currently includes a battery of multiple-choice items. Each item begins with a scenario which is intended to be relevant across contexts, and which can be used for children (from age 10  and above), adult members of the public and health professionals. People with expertise in research methods judged the items to have face validity, and end-users judged them relevant and acceptable in their settings. In response to feedback from methodologists and end-users, we simplified some text, explained terms where needed, and redesigned formats and instructions.

CONCLUSIONS

The Claim Evaluation Tools database is a flexible resource from which researchers, teachers and others can design measurement instruments to meet their own requirements. These evaluation tools are being managed and made freely available for non-commercial use (on request) through Testing Treatments interactive (testingtreatments.org).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

PACTR201606001679337 and PACTR201606001676150; Pre-results.

Do patients and health care providers have discordant preferences about which aspects of treatments matter most? Evidence from a systematic review of discrete choice experiments

OBJECTIVES

To review studies eliciting patient and healthcare provider preferences for healthcare interventions using discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to (1) review the methodology to evaluate similarities, differences, rigour of designs and whether comparisons are made at the aggregate level or account for individual heterogeneity; and (2) quantify the extent to which they demonstrate concordance of patient and healthcare provider preferences.

METHODS

A systematic review searching Medline, EMBASE, Econlit, PsycINFO and Web of Science for DCEs using patient and healthcare providers.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

peer-reviewed; complete empiric text in English from 1995 to 31July 2015; discussing a healthcare-related topic; DCE methodology; comparing patients and healthcare providers.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

RESULTS

We identified 38 papers exploring 16 interventions in 26 diseases/indications. Methods to analyse results, determine concordance between patient and physician values, and explore heterogeneity varied considerably between studies. The majority of studies we reviewed found more evidence of mixed concordance and discordance (n=28) or discordance of patient and healthcare provider preferences (n=12) than of concordant preferences (n=4). A synthesis of concordance suggested that healthcare providers rank structure and outcome attributes more highly than patients, while patients rank process attributes more highly than healthcare providers.

CONCLUSIONS

Discordant patient and healthcare provider preferences for different attributes of healthcare interventions are common. Concordance varies according to whether attributes are processes, structures or outcomes, and therefore determining preference concordance should consider all aspects jointly and not a binary outcome. DCE studies provide excellent opportunities to assess value concordance between patients and providers, but assessment of concordance was limited by a lack of consistency in the approaches used and consideration of heterogeneity of preferences. Future DCEs assessing concordance should fully report the framing of the questions and investigate the heterogeneity of preferences within groups and how these compare.

Assistive technologies for people with dementia: ethical considerations

The sustainable development goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations in 2015 include a new target for global health: SDG 3 aims to “ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages.” Dementia care of good quality is particularly important given the projected increase in the number of people living with the condition. A range of assistive technologies have been proposed to support dementia care. However, the World Health Organization estimated in 2017 that only one in 10 of the 1 billion or more people globally who could benefit from these technologies in some way actually has access to them. For people living with dementia, there has been little analysis of whether assistive technologies will support their human rights in ways that are consistent with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The aim of this paper is to examine the relevant provisions of the convention and consider their implications for the use of assistive technologies in dementia care. Assistive technologies can clearly play an important role in supporting social engagement, decision-making and advance planning by people living with dementia. However, concerns exist that some of these technologies also have the potential to restrict freedom of movement and intrude into privacy. In conclusion, an analysis of the implications of assistive technologies for human rights laws is needed to ensure that technologies are used in ways that support human rights and help meet the health-related SDG 3.

Using a patient decision aid for insulin initiation in patients with type 2 diabetes: a qualitative analysis of doctor-patient conversations in primary care consultations in Malaysia

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the use of apatient decision aid (PDA) for insulin initiation fulfils its purpose of facilitating patient-centred decision-making through identifying how doctors and patients interact when using the PDA during primary care consultations.

DESIGN

Conversation analysis of seven single cases of audio-recorded/video-recorded consultations between doctors and patients with type 2 diabetes, using a PDA on starting insulin.

SETTING

Primary care in three healthcare settings: (1) one private clinic; (2) two public community clinics and (3) one primary care clinic in a public university hospital, in Negeri Sembilan and the Klang Valley in Malaysia.

PARTICIPANTS

Clinicians and seven patients with type 2 diabetes to whom insulin had been recommended. Purposive sampling was used to select a sample high in variance across healthcare settings, participant demographics and perspectives on insulin.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Interaction between doctors and patients in a clinical consultation involving the use of a PDA about starting insulin.

RESULTS

Doctors brought the PDA into the conversation mainly by asking information-focused 'yes/no' questions, and used the PDA for information exchange only if patients said they had not read it. While their contributions were limited by doctors' questions, some patients disclosed issues or concerns. Although doctors' PDA-related questions acted as a presequence to deliberation on starting insulin, their interactional practices raised questions on whether patients were informed and their preferences prioritised.

CONCLUSIONS

Interactional practices can hinder effective PDA implementation, with habits from ordinary conversation potentially influencing doctors' practices and complicating their implementation of patient-centred decision-making. Effective interaction should therefore be emphasised in the design and delivery of PDAs and in training clinicians to use them.

Patient and physician views of shared decision making in cancer

CONTEXT

Engaging patients in shared decision making involves patient knowledge of treatment options and physician elicitation of patient preferences.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to explore patient and physician perceptions of shared decision making in clinical encounters for cancer care.

DESIGN

Patients and physicians were asked open-ended questions regarding their perceptions of shared decision making throughout their cancer care. Transcripts of interviews were coded and analysed for shared decision-making themes.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

At an academic medical centre, 20 cancer patients with a range of cancer diagnoses, stages of cancer and time from diagnosis, and eight physicians involved in cancer care were individually interviewed.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Most physicians reported providing patients with written information. However, most patients reported that written information was too detailed and felt that the physicians did not assess the level of information they wished to receive. Most patients wanted to play an active role in the treatment decision, but also wanted the physician's recommendation, such as what their physician would choose for him/herself or a family member in a similar situation. While physicians stated that they incorporated patient autonomy in decision making, most provided data without making treatment recommendations in the format preferred by most patients. We identified several communication gaps in cancer care. While patients want to be involved in the decision-making process, they also want physicians to provide evidence-based recommendations in the context of their individual preferences. However, physicians often are reluctant to provide a recommendation that will bias the patient.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

BACKGROUND

Decision aids are interventions that support patients by making their decisions explicit, providing information about options and associated benefits/harms, and helping clarify congruence between decisions and personal values.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of decision aids in people facing treatment or screening decisions.

SEARCH METHODS

Updated search (2012 to April 2015) in CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; PsycINFO; and grey literature; includes CINAHL to September 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published randomized controlled trials comparing decision aids to usual care and/or alternative interventions. For this update, we excluded studies comparing detailed versus simple decision aids.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made and the decision-making process.Secondary outcomes were behavioural, health, and health system effects.We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of studies that used the patient decision aid to prepare for the consultation and of those that used it in the consultation. We used GRADE to assess the strength of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 105 studies involving 31,043 participants. This update added 18 studies and removed 28 previously included studies comparing detailed versus simple decision aids. During the 'Risk of bias' assessment, we rated two items (selective reporting and blinding of participants/personnel) as mostly unclear due to inadequate reporting. Twelve of 105 studies were at high risk of bias.With regard to the attributes of the choice made, decision aids increased participants' knowledge (MD 13.27/100; 95% confidence interval (CI) 11.32 to 15.23; 52 studies; N = 13,316; high-quality evidence), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 2.10; 95% CI 1.66 to 2.66; 17 studies; N = 5096; moderate-quality evidence), and congruency between informed values and care choices (RR 2.06; 95% CI 1.46 to 2.91; 10 studies; N = 4626; low-quality evidence) compared to usual care.Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, decision aids decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -9.28/100; 95% CI -12.20 to -6.36; 27 studies; N = 5707; high-quality evidence), indecision about personal values (MD -8.81/100; 95% CI -11.99 to -5.63; 23 studies; N = 5068; high-quality evidence), and the proportion of people who were passive in decision making (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.83; 16 studies; N = 3180; moderate-quality evidence).Decision aids reduced the proportion of undecided participants and appeared to have a positive effect on patient-clinician communication. Moreover, those exposed to a decision aid were either equally or more satisfied with their decision, the decision-making process, and/or the preparation for decision making compared to usual care.Decision aids also reduced the number of people choosing major elective invasive surgery in favour of more conservative options (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.00; 18 studies; N = 3844), but this reduction reached statistical significance only after removing the study on prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer gene carriers (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.97; 17 studies; N = 3108). Compared to usual care, decision aids reduced the number of people choosing prostate-specific antigen screening (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98; 10 studies; N = 3996) and increased those choosing to start new medications for diabetes (RR 1.65; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.56; 4 studies; N = 447). For other testing and screening choices, mostly there were no differences between decision aids and usual care.The median effect of decision aids on length of consultation was 2.6 minutes longer (24 versus 21; 7.5% increase). The costs of the decision aid group were lower in two studies and similar to usual care in four studies. People receiving decision aids do not appear to differ from those receiving usual care in terms of anxiety, general health outcomes, and condition-specific health outcomes. Studies did not report adverse events associated with the use of decision aids.In subgroup analysis, we compared results for decision aids used in preparation for the consultation versus during the consultation, finding similar improvements in pooled analysis for knowledge and accurate risk perception. For other outcomes, we could not conduct formal subgroup analyses because there were too few studies in each subgroup.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care across a wide variety of decision contexts, people exposed to decision aids feel more knowledgeable, better informed, and clearer about their values, and they probably have a more active role in decision making and more accurate risk perceptions. There is growing evidence that decision aids may improve values-congruent choices. There are no adverse effects on health outcomes or satisfaction. New for this updated is evidence indicating improved knowledge and accurate risk perceptions when decision aids are used either within or in preparation for the consultation. Further research is needed on the effects on adherence with the chosen option, cost-effectiveness, and use with lower literacy populations.

Personalized glucose forecasting for type 2 diabetes using data assimilation

Type 2 diabetes leads to premature death and reduced quality of life for 8% of Americans. Nutrition management is critical to maintaining glycemic control, yet it is difficult to achieve due to the high individual differences in glycemic response to nutrition. Anticipating glycemic impact of different meals can be challenging not only for individuals with diabetes, but also for expert diabetes educators. Personalized computational models that can accurately forecast an impact of a given meal on an individual's blood glucose levels can serve as the engine for a new generation of decision support tools for individuals with diabetes. However, to be useful in practice, these computational engines need to generate accurate forecasts based on limited datasets consistent with typical self-monitoring practices of individuals with type 2 diabetes. This paper uses three forecasting machines: (i) data assimilation, a technique borrowed from atmospheric physics and engineering that uses Bayesian modeling to infuse data with human knowledge represented in a mechanistic model, to generate real-time, personalized, adaptable glucose forecasts; (ii) model averaging of data assimilation output; and (iii) dynamical Gaussian process model regression. The proposed data assimilation machine, the primary focus of the paper, uses a modified dual unscented Kalman filter to estimate states and parameters, personalizing the mechanistic models. Model selection is used to make a personalized model selection for the individual and their measurement characteristics. The data assimilation forecasts are empirically evaluated against actual postprandial glucose measurements captured by individuals with type 2 diabetes, and against predictions generated by experienced diabetes educators after reviewing a set of historical nutritional records and glucose measurements for the same individual. The evaluation suggests that the data assimilation forecasts compare well with specific glucose measurements and match or exceed in accuracy expert forecasts. We conclude by examining ways to present predictions as forecast-derived range quantities and evaluate the comparative advantages of these ranges.

A qualitative study exploring why individuals opt out of lung cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer screening with annual low-dose computed tomography is relatively new for long-term smokers in the USA supported by a US Preventive Services Task Force Grade B recommendation. As screening programs are more widely implemented nationally and providers engage patients about lung cancer screening, it is critical to understand behaviour among high-risk smokers who opt out to improve shared decision-making processes for lung cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to explore the reasons for screening-eligible patients' decisions to opt out of screening after receiving a provider recommendation.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews were performed with 18 participants who met lung cancer screening criteria for age, smoking and pack-year history in Washington State from November 2015 to January 2016. Two researchers with cancer screening and qualitative methodology expertise conducted data analysis using thematic content analytic procedures from audio-recorded interviews.

RESULTS

Five primary themes emerged for reasons of opting out of lung cancer screening: (i) Knowledge Avoidance; (ii) Perceived Low Value; (iii) False-Positive Worry; (iv) Practical Barriers; and (v) Patient Misunderstanding.

CONCLUSION

The participants in our study provided insight into why some patients make the decision to opt out of low-dose computed tomography screening, which provides knowledge that can inform intervention development to enhance shared decision-making processes between long-term smokers and their providers and decrease decisional conflict about screening.

Decision making for breast cancer prevention among women at elevated risk

Several medical management approaches have been shown to be effective in preventing breast cancer and detecting it early among women at elevated risk: 1) prophylactic mastectomy; 2) prophylactic oophorectomy; 3) chemoprevention; and 4) enhanced screening routines. To varying extents, however, these approaches are substantially underused relative to clinical practice recommendations. This article reviews the existing research on the uptake of these prevention approaches, the characteristics of women who are likely to use various methods, and the decision-making processes that underlie the differing choices of women. It also highlights important areas for future research, detailing the types of studies that are particularly needed in four key areas: documenting women's perspectives on their own perceptions of risk and prevention decisions; explicit comparisons of available prevention pathways and their likely health effects; the psychological, interpersonal, and social processes of prevention decision making; and the dynamics of subgroup variation. Ultimately, this research could support the development of interventions that more fully empower women to make informed and values-consistent decisions, and to move towards favorable health outcomes.

Observational study of the development and evaluation of a fertility preservation patient decision aid for teenage and adult women diagnosed with cancer: the Cancer, Fertility and Me research protocol

INTRODUCTION

Women diagnosed with cancer and facing potentially sterilising cancer treatment have to make time-pressured decisions regarding fertility preservation with specialist fertility services while undergoing treatment of their cancer with oncology services. Oncologists identify a need for resources enabling them to support women's fertility preservation decisions more effectively; women report wanting more specialist information to make these decisions. The overall aim of the 'Cancer, Fertility and Me' study is to develop and evaluate a new evidence-based patient decision aid (PtDA) for women with any cancer considering fertility preservation to address this unmet need.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective mixed-method observational study including women of reproductive age (16 years +) with a new diagnosis of any cancer across two regional cancer and fertility centres in Yorkshire, UK. The research involves three stages. In stage 1, the aim is to develop the PtDA using a systematic method of evidence synthesis and multidisciplinary expert review of current clinical practice and patient information. In stage 2, the aim is to assess the face validity of the PtDA. Feedback on its content and format will be ascertained using questionnaires and interviews with patients, user groups and key stakeholders. Finally, in stage 3 the acceptability of using this resource when integrated into usual cancer care pathways at the point of cancer diagnosis and treatment planning will be evaluated. This will involve a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the PtDA in clinical practice. Measures chosen include using count data of the PtDAs administered in clinics and accessed online, decisional and patient-reported outcome measures and qualitative feedback. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive statistics, paired sample t-tests and CIs; interviews will be analysed using thematic analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Research Ethics Committee approval (Ref: 16/EM/0122) and Health Research Authority approval (Ref: 194751) has been granted. Findings will be published in open access peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences for academic and health professional audiences, with feedback to health professionals and program managers. The Cancer, Fertility and Me patient decision aid (PtDA) will be disseminated via a diverse range of open-access media, study and charity websites, professional organisations and academic sources. External endorsement will be sought from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration inventory of PtDAs and other relevant professional organisations, for example, the British Fertility Society.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02753296; pre-results.

What role does health literacy play in patients' involvement in medical decision-making?

Patients vary in their preferences towards involvement in medical decision-making. Previous research, however, gives no clear explanation for this observed variation in their involvement. One possible explanation might be health literacy. Health literacy refers to personal characteristics and social resources needed for people to access, understand and use information to make decisions about their health. This study aimed to examine the relationship between health literacy and self-reported patient involvement. With respect to health literacy, we focused on those competences relevant for medical decision-making. We hypothesized that people with higher health literacy report that they are more involved in medical decision-making. A structured questionnaire was sent to members of the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel in May 2015 (response 46%, N = 974). Health literacy was measured using five scales of the Health Literacy Questionnaire. A regression model was used to estimate the relationship between health literacy and self-reported involvement. In general, our results did not show a relationship between health literacy and self-reported involvement. We did find a positive significant association between the health literacy scale appraisal of health information and self-reported involvement. Our hypothesis was partly confirmed. The results from this study suggest that higher order competences, that is to say critical health literacy, in particular, are important in reporting involvement in medical decision-making. Future research is recommended to unravel further the relationship between health literacy and patient involvement in order to gain insight into whether health literacy might be an asset to enhance patient participation in medical decision-making.

A systematic review of effectiveness of decision aids to assist older patients at the end of life

OBJECTIVE

To describe the range of decision aids (DAs) available to enable informed choice for older patients at the end of life and assess their effectiveness or acceptability.

METHODS

Search strategy covered PubMed, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBM Reviews, CINAHL and PsycInfo between 1995 and 2015. The quality criteria framework endorsed by the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) was used to assess usefulness.

RESULTS

Seventeen DA interventions for patients, their surrogates or health professionals were included. Half the DAs were designed for self-administration and few described use of facilitators for decision-making.

TREATMENT

options and associated harms and benefits, and patient preferences were most commonly included. Patient values, treatment goals, numeric disease-specific prognostic information and financial implications of decisions were generally not covered. DAs at the end of life are generally acceptable by users, and appear to increase knowledge and reduce decisional conflict but this effectiveness is mainly based on low-level evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuing evaluation of DAs in routine practice to support advance care planning is worth exploring further. In particular, this would be useful for conditions such as cancer, or situations such as major surgery where prognostic data is known, or in dementia where concordance on primary goals of care between surrogates and the treating team can be improved.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Given the sensitivities of end-of-life, self-administered DAs are inappropriate in this context and genuine informed decision-making cannot happen while those gaps in the instruments remain.

Randomised trial assessing the impact of framing of fracture risk and osteoporosis treatment benefits in patients undergoing bone densitometry

OBJECTIVES

The accuracy of patients' perception of risk is important for decisions about treatment in many diseases. We framed the risk of fracture and benefits of treatment in different ways and assessed the impact on patients' perception of fracture risk and intentions to take medication.

DESIGN

Randomised trial of 4 different presentations of fracture risk and likely benefits from osteoporosis treatment.

SETTING

Academic centre.

PARTICIPANTS

200 patients undergoing bone densitometry.

INTERVENTION

Presentation that framed the patient's absolute fracture risk either as the chance of having or not having an event, with their likely benefits from osteoporosis treatment in natural frequencies or numbers needed to treat.

OUTCOMES

Participants' views about their fracture risk and the need for osteoporosis treatment.

RESULTS

The median 5-year fracture risk threshold participants regarded as high enough to consider preventative medication was 50-60%, and did not change substantially after the presentation. The median (Q1, Q3) 5-year risk initially estimated by participants was 20% (10, 50) for any fracture and 19% (10, 40) for hip fracture. 61% considered their fracture risk was low or very low, and 59-67% considered their fracture risk was lower than average. These participant estimates were 2-3 times higher than Garvan calculator estimates for any fracture, and 10-20 times higher for hip fracture. Participant estimates of fracture risk halved after the presentation, but remained higher than the Garvan estimates (1.5-2 times for any fracture, 5-10 times for hip fracture). There was no difference in these outcomes between the randomised groups. Participants' intentions about taking medication to prevent fractures were not substantially affected by receiving information about fracture risk and treatment benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

Altering the framing of estimated fracture risks and treatment benefits had little effect on participants' perception of the need to take treatment or their individual fracture risk.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12613001081707; Pre-results.

Feasibility and efficacy of shared decision making for first-admission schizophrenia: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The feasibility of shared decision making (SDM) for patients with schizophrenia remains controversial due to the assumed inability of patients to cooperate in treatment decision making. This study evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of SDM in patients upon first admission for schizophrenia.

METHODS

This was a randomized, parallel-group, two-arm, open-label, single-center study conducted in an acute psychiatric ward of Numazu Chuo Hospital, Japan. Patients with the diagnosis of schizophrenia upon their first admission were randomized into a SDM intervention group or a usual treatment group in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was patient satisfaction at discharge. The secondary outcomes were attitudes toward medication at discharge and treatment continuation at 6 months after discharge.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients were randomly assigned. The trial was prematurely terminated due to slow enrollment. At discharge, the mean score on satisfaction was 23.7 in the SDM group and 22.1 in the usual care group (unadjusted mean difference: 1.6; 95% CI: -5.2 to 2.0). Group differences were not observed in attitude toward medication and treatment continuation. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups for the mean Global Assessment of Functioning score at discharge or length of stay as safety endpoint.

CONCLUSIONS

No statistical differences were found between the SDM group and usual care group in the efficacy outcomes and safety endpoints. Large trials are needed to confirm the efficacy of the SDM program upon first admission for schizophrenia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study has been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01869660 (registered 27 May, 2013).

A randomized controlled trial comparing self-referral to inpatient treatment and treatment as usual in patients with severe mental disorders

BACKGROUND

There has been a call for increased patient autonomy and participation in psychiatry. Some Community Mental Health Centres (CMHC) have implemented services called 'self-referral to inpatient treatment' (SRIT) for patients with severe mental disorders.

AIMS

To investigate whether SRIT could yield better outcomes after 12 months in use of mental health services for people with severe mental disorders than Treatment As Usual (TAU).

METHODS

This was a randomized controlled trial at a CMHC in Norway comparing SRIT and TAU in 12 months. Fifty-four patients with severe mental disorders were included. The patients in the SRIT group could admit themselves as inpatients for up to 5 days for each admission with at least a 2 weeks pause between the admittances.

RESULTS

Twenty out of 26 participants (77%) in the SRIT group used the SRIT for a median of 1.5 admissions and 5 inpatient days. With the exception of a somewhat larger number of admissions at the CMHC in the SRIT group, no significant differences were found between the two groups in days as inpatients, admissions, outpatient contacts or coercion. Both groups reduced their inpatients days by 40%.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the SRIT and the TAU groups reduced their use of services during the 12 months intervention period. Giving patients with severe mental disorders the possibility to self-refer did not change the use of services.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Self-referral to inpatient treatment for patients with severe mental disorders might increase patient autonomy, but does not seem to save use of inpatient services.

Decision support systems for personalized and participative radiation oncology

A paradigm shift from current population based medicine to personalized and participative medicine is underway. This transition is being supported by the development of clinical decision support systems based on prediction models of treatment outcome. In radiation oncology, these models 'learn' using advanced and innovative information technologies (ideally in a distributed fashion - please watch the animation: http://youtu.be/ZDJFOxpwqEA) from all available/appropriate medical data (clinical, treatment, imaging, biological/genetic, etc.) to achieve the highest possible accuracy with respect to prediction of tumor response and normal tissue toxicity. In this position paper, we deliver an overview of the factors that are associated with outcome in radiation oncology and discuss the methodology behind the development of accurate prediction models, which is a multi-faceted process. Subsequent to initial development/validation and clinical introduction, decision support systems should be constantly re-evaluated (through quality assurance procedures) in different patient datasets in order to refine and re-optimize the models, ensuring the continuous utility of the models. In the reasonably near future, decision support systems will be fully integrated within the clinic, with data and knowledge being shared in a standardized, dynamic, and potentially global manner enabling truly personalized and participative medicine.

Standardized screening for periodontitis as an integral part of multidisciplinary management of adults with type 2 diabetes: an observational cross-sectional study of cohorts in the USA and UK

OBJECTIVE

To determine prevalence and factors predictive of periodontitis by using a standardized assessment model in adults with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We performed an observational cross-sectional study to determine the burden of periodontitis in adults with type 2 diabetes attending urban, ambulatory referral centers in the USA and UK. Full-mouth probing was performed and periodontitis was diagnosed based on either a low (≥5 mm at ≥1 site) or high pocket probing-depth threshold (≥6 mm at ≥1 site). Results were stratified into a five-stage schema and integrated with other clinical variables into the novel Diabetes Cross-Disciplinary Index to function as a balanced health scorecard. Corresponding demographic and routinely collected health data were obtained and comparisons were made between patients with and without periodontitis. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors predictive of the presence or absence of periodontitis.

RESULTS

Between our two cohorts, 253 patients were screened. Caucasians comprised >90% and Hispanic Americans >75% of the UK and US cohorts, respectively. Males and females were equally distributed; mean age was 53.6±11 years; and 17 (6.7%) were edentulous. Of the 236 dentate patients, 128 (54.2%) had periodontitis by low threshold and 57 (24.2%) by high threshold. Just 17 (7.2%) were periodontally healthy. No significant differences in age, HbA1c, blood pressure, body mass index, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, or smoking status (all p>0.05) were identified between those with or without periodontitis (regardless of threshold) and none was found to be a significant predictor of disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Periodontitis is frequent in adults with type 2 diabetes and all should be screened. Periodontal health status can be visualized with other comorbidities and complications using a novel balanced scorecard that could facilitate patient-clinician communication, shared decision-making, and prioritization of individual healthcare needs.

Patient involvement in healthcare professional practice - a question about knowledge

The concept of patient involvement is ambiguous and contested in the healthcare systems in Western Europe and North America. Current research indicates that patients only feel moderately involved in their treatment and care. This article builds on a study of chronically ill patients' perspectives on healthcare practice in Greenland. It discusses the significance of including in healthcare practice knowledge of patients' everyday lives with illness and their own views on their situations. Research was qualitative and ethnographic. Participants were followed with participant observations and qualitative interviews for 2.5 years during hospital stay in the capital Nuuk and in their homes in towns and settlements during 2010-2013. Results show that patients are concerned about how to manage their life with illness on a daily basis. Their everyday life activities demonstrate the resources they have to live with illness. However, procedures for healthcare practice concentrate on treatment of the physical disease. Knowledge about psychosocial needs for care and rehabilitation tend to be excluded. The study points to potential for improving professional practice through healthcare professionals' active investigation of patients' everyday lives and values, integration of this knowledge into their professional practice and developing structures for this kind of involvement.

Shared Decision Making and the Use of Decision Aids

BACKGROUND

In shared decision making (SDM), the patient and the physician reach decisions in partnership. We conducted a trial of SDM training for physicians who treat patients with cancer.

METHODS

Physicians who treat patients with cancer were invited to participate in a cluster-randomized trial and carry out SDM together with breast or colon cancer patients who faced decisions about their treatment. Decision-related physician-patient conversations were recorded. The patients filled out questionnaires immediately after the consultations (T1) and three months later (T2). The primary endpoints were the patients' confidence in and satisfaction with the decisions taken. The secondary endpoints were the process of decision making, anxiety, depression, quality of life, and externally assessed physician competence in SDM. The physicians in the intervention group underwent 12 hours of training in SDM, including the use of decision aids.

RESULTS

Of the 900 physicians invited to participated in the trial, 105 answered the invitation. 86 were randomly assigned to either the intervention group or the control group (44 and 42 physicians, respectively); 33 of the 86 physicians recruited at least one patient for the trial. A total of 160 patients participated in the trial, of whom 55 were treated by physicians in the intervention group. There were no intergroup differences in the primary endpoints. Trained physicians were more competent in SDM (Cohen's d = 0.56; p<0.05). Patients treated by trained physicians had lower anxiety and depression scores immediately after the consultation (d = -0.12 and -0.14, respectively; p<0.10), and markedly lower anxiety and depression scores three months later (d = -0.94 and -0.67, p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

When physicians treating cancer patients improve their competence in SDM by appropriate training, their patients may suffer less anxiety and depression. These effects merit further study.