Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

Measuring decision aid effectiveness for end-of-life care: A systematic review

Objective

To systematically review research analyzing the effectiveness of decision aids for end-of-life care, including how researchers specifically measure decision aid success.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review synthesizing quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods study results using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Four databases were searched through February 18, 2023. Inclusion criteria required articles to evaluate end-of-life care decision aids. The review is registered under PROSPERO (#CRD42023408449).

Results

A total of 715 articles were initially identified, with 43 meeting the inclusion criteria. Outcome measures identified included decisional conflict, less aggressive care desired, knowledge improvements, communication improvements, tool satisfaction, patient anxiety and well-being, and less aggressive care action completed. The majority of studies reported positive outcomes especially when the decision aid development included International Patient Decision Aid Standards.

Conclusion

Research examining end of life care decision aid use consistently reports positive outcomes.

Innovation

This review presents data that can guide the next generation of decision aids for end-of-life care, namely using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards in developing tools and showing which tools are effective for helping to prevent the unnecessary suffering that can result when patients' dying preferences are unknown.

Have a vital end-user been overlooked? Developing a shared decision intervention for patients with potential pancreatic cancer regarding the choice of surgery

Objective

To develop a patient decision aid facilitating shared decision making for patients with potential pancreatic cancer deciding about no treatment, surgical or medical treatment.

Methods

Based on a user-centred design by Wittemann et al., we developed a shared decision making intervention in three phases: 1) Understanding decision needs 2) Development of a patient decision aid (PtDA) based on a generic template 3) Assessment of the intervention from interviews with patients (n = 11), relatives (n = 11), nurses (n = 4) and surgeons (n = 2) analysed with thematic analysis, and measuring patients' perceptions of choice of options with the Decisional Conflict Scale.

Results

Results showed varying experiences with the use of the PtDA, with surgeons not finding PtDA useful as it was impractical and constraining with patients' conversations. There was no difference in patients' perceptions in choosing options for those being presented vs those patients not being presented for the PtDA.

Conclusion

The format and structure of the PtDA was not feasible for the surgeons as fundamental users in the present clinic.

Innovation

This study highlights the urgent need to consider clinical context before introducing a predefined tool and shows the importance of a multistakeholder approach. Research should focus on finding means to successful implement shared decision making.

Online communication skill training of patients with cancer: A test of the behavioral intention predictive framework for communication skills

Objective

To assess the Behavioral Intention Predictive Framework's utility in explaining variation in cancer patients' strong behavioral intention (SBI) to use LEAPS (Listen, Educate, Assess, Partner, Support) communication skills after viewing training videos.

Methods

Ninety-eight patients were enrolled through anonymized online platforms to view LEAPS training videos, complete background and communication questionnaires and report their SBI to use LEAPS skills.

Results

On average, patients indicated SBI to use 6 of 13 skills and 46% of patients expressed SBI across individual skills. The framework explained 27.7% of the adjusted variance in SBI with significant predictors of frequent past use of LEAPS-related shared decision-making behaviors, poor emotional health, being rarely accompanied to visits and positive ratings of narrative videos. Finally, 21.7% of the adjusted variance in problem communication was explained by infrequent use of LEAPS-related information behaviors, patient accompaniment of another adult and positive narrative scores.

Conclusion

Patients SBI to use multiple LEAPS skills and past problem communication were explained by framework predictors.

Innovation

Despite theoretical and empirical evidence that behavioral intention significantly predicts behavior, it has not been studied in patient communication research. Application of the novel framework to LEAPS training videos contributes an innovative address of this research gap.

Feasibility and acceptability of chaplain decision coaching on Periviable resuscitation decision quality: A pilot study

Objective

To pilot test and assess the feasibility and acceptability of chaplain-led decision coaching alongside the GOALS (Getting Optimal Alignment around Life Support) decision support tool to enhance decision-making in threatened periviable delivery.

Methods

Pregnant people admitted for threatened periviable delivery and their 'important other' (IO) were enrolled. Decisional conflict, acceptability, and knowledge were measured before and after the intervention. Chaplains journaled their impressions of training and coaching encounters. Descriptive analysis and conventional content analysis were completed.

Results

Eight pregnant people and two IOs participated. Decisional conflict decreased by a mean of 6.7 (SD = 9.4) and knowledge increased by a mean of 1.4 (SD = 1.8). All rated their experience as "good" or "excellent," and the amount of information was "just right." Participants found it "helpful to have someone to talk to" and noted chaplains helped them reach a decision. Chaplains found the intervention a valuable use of their time and skillset.

Conclusion

This is the first small-scale pilot study to utilize chaplains as decision coaches. Our results suggest that chaplain coaching with a decision support tool is feasible and well-accepted by parents and chaplains.

Innovations

Our findings recognize chaplains as an underutilized, yet practical resource in value-laden clinical decision-making.

Women's experiences with opting out of cervical cancer screening and the role of the nurse in the women's decision-making process

AIM

To explore Danish women's experiences with opting out of cervical cancer screening and the role of the nurse in the women's decision-making process.

DESIGN

A qualitative study using semi-structured, individual interviews with a phenomenological-hermeneutic approach.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with 13 women with experience in opting out of cervical cancer screening. Women were recruited through a public flyer and interviewed virtually or by phone. The interviews were analysed using the theory of interpretation from Paul Ricoeur and consisted of three levels: naïve reading, structural analysis, and critical discussion and analysis. The present study adheres to the COREQ guidelines.

RESULTS

The women experience various personal causes for opting out of cervical cancer screening, such as low accessibility of screening appointments, discomfort during the smear test, fear of being sick, and insufficient information about the relevance of screening to the individual woman. The perceived disadvantages of screening outweighed their perceived advantages. The women's experiences did not include the role of the nurse in the procedures and knowledge sharing related to cervical cancer screening. However, nurses were described as having good communicative and relational qualifications relevant to being involved in cervical cancer screening.

CONCLUSION

It was challenging for the women to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of cervical cancer screening and thus to make an informed decision about participation. They expressed a need for more information on which to base their decision. This places nurses in a much needed, yet unexplored, role of identifying and lowering potential personal barriers that may outweigh the women's perceived benefits of participating in screening.

IMPLICATION FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

Nurses should play a more active role in cervical cancer screening such as improving general knowledge and facilitating two-way communication about its relevance.

REPORTING METHOD

The present study adheres to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) guidelines.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public contribution.

Effectiveness of computerised decision aids for patients with chronic diseases in shared decision-making: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To synthesise the composition and effectiveness of computer-based patient decision aid (PDAs) in interventions for patients with chronic diseases.

DESIGN

A systematic review with meta-analysis.

METHODS

Five databases were searched, and only randomised controlled trials (RCTs)were included. This review was conducted with the PRISMA guidelines. The JBI Appraisal Tools for randomised trials were used to assess the risk of bias. We used the random-effects model to conduct meta-analyses. Evidence from RCTs was synthesised using standardised mean differences or mean differences. The GRADE system was employed to assess the certainty of evidence and recommendations. This study was registered on PROSPERO (number: CRD42022369340).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were searched for studies published before October 2022.

RESULTS

The review included 22 studies, and most computer-based PDAs reported information on the disease, treatment options, pros and cons and risk comparison and value clarification. The use of computer-based PDAs showed a significant effect on decision conflict and knowledge, but not on decision regret, satisfaction, self-efficacy, anxiety and quality of life. The overall GRADE certainty of evidence was low.

CONCLUSION

Although the quality of evidence was low, however, using computer-based PDAs could reduce decision conflict and enhance knowledge when making medical decisions. More research is needed to support the contention above.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Computer-based PDAs could assist health-care providers and patients in the shared decision-making process and improving the quality of decision-making.

REPORTING METHOD

This study adhered to PRISMA guidelines. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION.

Shared medical decision in prostate cancer screening in primary care: a systematic literature review of current evidence

PURPOSE

Prostate cancer screening has not significantly reduced mortality. International guidelines strongly endorse shared decision-making to navigate risks, emphasizing its crucial role prior to prescribing a prostate-specific antigen test. This study aims to provide insight into the current role of shared decision-making in primary care for prostate cancer screening and suggest ways to improve the process.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane, and Lissa databases were searched for following terms: 'prostate-specific antigen' or 'prostate cancer screening' combined with 'shared decision making', 'informed decision making' or 'decision support' and 'primary care'. All studies were screened by two independent reviewers. This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Of 85 articles screened, 34 were included. Key findings included heterogenous and poor quality implementation of shared decision-making in practice, patients with limited knowledge of shared decision-making, clinicians infrequently discussing patients' views, decision aids that could be better integrated into practice, and finally, changes in care systems to support the expansion of shared decision-making in prostate cancer screening.

CONCLUSION

Decision aids are essential tools in the informed decision-making process. Integrating these elements into practice would require training for doctors and adjustments to the healthcare system.

Predictors of knowledge and knowledge gain after decision aid use among women with BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors contributing to baseline knowledge in women with BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs) and knowledge gain after decision aid (DA) use.

METHODS

Women with PVs in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes were randomly assigned to an intervention group (IG) receiving DAs or a control group (CG). Of the total sample, 417 completed the baseline survey and were included in this analysis. Two multiple regression analyses were conducted: baseline data on socio-demographic, medical, decision-related and psychological variables were used to identify predictors for (1) baseline knowledge within the total group and (2) knowledge gain within the IG after DA use three months post study inclusion.

RESULTS

At baseline, higher education status, no breast cancer history, and lower decisional conflict related to higher knowledge within the total group. After DA use within the IG, higher baseline scores for decisional conflict predicted higher knowledge gain, and higher baseline scores for depression and intrusion predicted lower knowledge gain.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified predictors of baseline knowledge and knowledge gain after DA use in women with BRCA1/2 PVs.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Awareness of facilitating and hindering factors on these women's knowledge can improve understanding of their health literacy and enable further targeted support interventions.

Design, implementation and usability analysis of patient empowerment in ADLIFE project via patient reported outcome measures and shared decision making

INTRODUCTION

This paper outlines the design, implementation, and usability study results of the patient empowerment process for chronic disease management, using Patient Reported Outcome Measurements and Shared Decision-Making Processes.

BACKGROUND

The ADLIFE project aims to develop innovative, digital health solutions to support personalized, integrated care for patients with severe long-term conditions such as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and/or Chronic Heart Failure. Successful long-term management of patients with chronic conditions requires active patient self-management and a proactive involvement of patients in their healthcare and treatment. This calls for a patient-provider partnership within an integrated system of collaborative care, supporting self-management, shared-decision making, collection of patient reported outcome measures, education, and follow-up.

METHODS

ADLIFE follows an outcome-based and patient-centered approach where PROMs represent an especially valuable tool to evaluate the outcomes of the care delivered. We have selected 11 standardized PROMs for evaluating the most recent patients' clinical context, enabling the decision-making process, and personalized care planning. The ADLIFE project implements the "SHARE approach' for enabling shared decision-making via two digital platforms for healthcare professionals and patients. We have successfully integrated PROMs and shared decision-making processes into our digital toolbox, based on an international interoperability standard, namely HL7 FHIR. A usability study was conducted with 3 clinical sites with 20 users in total to gather feedback and to subsequently prioritize updates to the ADLIFE toolbox.

RESULTS

User satisfaction is measured in the QUIS7 questionnaire on a 9-point scale in the following aspects: overall reaction, screen, terminology and tool feedback, learning, multimedia, training material and system capabilities. With all the average scores above 6 in all categories, most respondents have a positive reaction to the ADLIFE PEP platform and find it easy to use. We have identified shortcomings and have prioritized updates to the platform before clinical pilot studies are initiated.

CONCLUSIONS

Having finalized design, implementation, and pre-deployment usability studies, and updated the tool based on further feedback, our patient empowerment mechanisms enabled via PROMs and shared decision-making processes are ready to be piloted in clinal settings. Clinical studies will be conducted based at six healthcare settings across Spain, UK, Germany, Denmark, and Israel.

Exploring practice and perspectives on shared decision-making about osteoporosis medicines in Fracture Liaison Services: the iFraP development qualitative study

Interviews and focus groups with patients, FLS clinicians, and GPs identified challenges relating to clinical and shared decision-making about bone health and osteoporosis medicines. Findings will inform the development of the multicomponent iFraP intervention to address identified training needs and barriers to implementation to facilitate SDM about osteoporosis medicines.

PURPOSE

The iFraP (improving uptake of Fracture Prevention treatments) study aimed to develop a multicomponent intervention, including an osteoporosis decision support tool (DST), to support shared decision-making (SDM) about osteoporosis medicines. To inform iFraP intervention development, this qualitative study explored current practice in relation to communication about bone health and osteoporosis medicines, anticipated barriers to, and facilitators of, an osteoporosis DST, and perceived training needs.

METHODS

Patients attending an FLS consultation (n = 8), FLS clinicians (n = 9), and general practitioners (GPs; n = 7) were purposively sampled to participate in a focus group and/or telephone interview. Data were transcribed, inductively coded, and then mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) as a deductive framework to systematically identify possible barriers to, and facilitators of, implementing a DST.

RESULTS

Inductive codes were deductively mapped to 12 TDF domains. FLS clinicians were perceived to have specialist expertise (knowledge). However, clinicians described aspects of clinical decision-making and risk communication as difficult (cognitive skills). Patients reflected on decisional uncertainty about medicines (decision processes). Discussions about current practice and the proposed DST indicated opportunities to facilitate SDM, if identified training needs are met. Potential individual and system-level barriers to implementation were identified, such as differences in FLS configuration and a move to remote consulting (environmental context and resources).

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding of current practice revealed unmet training needs, indicating that using a DST in isolation would be unlikely to produce a sustained shift to SDM. Findings will shape iFraP intervention development to address unmet needs.

Shared decision-making in advanced physiotherapy and first contact physiotherapy management of adults with musculoskeletal disorders in the United Kingdom: An online cross-sectional survey

RATIONALE

Advanced practice physiotherapy roles (Advanced Physiotherapy Practitioners [APPs] and First Contact Physiotherapists [FCPs]) are pivotal in supporting patients to manage their musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. Having a greater understanding of how decisions are made by these practitioners will inform competency frameworks and improve the provision of patient-centred care.

AIM

To evaluate the current knowledge, views and use of shared decision-making in MSK advanced physiotherapy practice in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey using an online questionnaire was used to collect demographic information, knowledge, views and self-reported use of shared decision-making (SDM) of APPs and FCPs who work with adults with MSK disorders in the United Kingdom.

RESULTS

Responses from 49 participants (25 APPs and 24 FCPs) were included in the study. In total, 80% of participants had received SDM training and overall high levels of knowledge were shown. Only 12% of participants used a communication model to facilitate SDM. In total, 80% of participants reported making decisions together with the patient either always or most of the time. FCPs favoured a more patient-led approach to decision-making compared to APPs who favoured collaborative decision-making. The most commonly reported barriers to SDM included lack of time, lack of patient education resources, lack of access to patient decision aids and treatment pathway restrictions.

CONCLUSIONS

The responses in this study showed that overall APPs and FCPs have good knowledge of SDM and report routine use of collaborative and patient-led decision-making approaches.

The achievement of pre-operative expectations in patients undergoing knee arthroplasty: a cohort study evaluating unique patient goals

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a common procedure employed to treat end-stage osteoarthritis. While TKA is generally believed to have acceptable outcomes, many patients report pain or functional deficits not in line with their expectation following the procedure. It has been postulated that patient's pre-operative expectations regarding post-operative treatment outcomes play a significant role in satisfaction. It is therefore important to assess if the outcomes of surgery truly align with patient's individual expectations. Thus, the purpose of this study was to determine the degree to which patient expectations of TKA are achieved and the contribution of TKA to achieving patient goals one year after surgery.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of 110 patients booked for total knee arthroplasty were asked to identify their most important goals to inform the Direct Questioning of Objectives Index (DQO Index, range 0 to 1) and identify their surgical goals and grade their expectation that a knee arthroplasty would achieve each goal on an 11-point scale. One year after surgery, the DQO Index was repeated to assess their current ability to achieve each pre-operative goal, and asked to estimate the contribution of their knee arthroplasty in achieving each goal. Mean differences between baseline and one year follow-up were calculated regarding the DQO Index and expected achievement of pre-operative goals.

RESULTS

According to the DQO Index at one year, patients improved from a poor quality of life pre-operatively (mean ± standard deviation: 0.20 ± 0.18) to moderately high quality of life (mean ± standard deviation: 0.71 ± 0.21) reflecting a large improvement in ability to achieve each goal. Although achievement improved, for each goal, the patient estimates of the extent to which the knee arthroplasty had contributed to achieving the goal was lower than their initial expectation provided pre-operatively (mean difference range: 0.6 to 1.9 on an 11-point scale).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing TKA have high expectations that their surgery will address their primary goals. Despite surgery largely achieving these goals (improved pain and function), the extent to which the goals were achieved was lower than patients had expected pre-operatively.

A multicenter randomized trial to compare automatic versus as-needed follow-up for children hospitalized with common infections: The FAAN-C trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Physicians commonly recommend automatic primary care follow-up visits to children being discharged from the hospital. While automatic follow-up provides an opportunity to address postdischarge needs, the alternative is as-needed follow-up. With this strategy, families monitor their child's symptoms and decide if they need a follow-up visit in the days after discharge. In addition to being family centered, as-needed follow-up has the potential to reduce time and financial burdens on both families and the healthcare system. As-needed follow-up has been shown to be safe and effective for children hospitalized with bronchiolitis, but the extent to which hospitalized children with other common conditions might benefit from as-needed follow-up is unclear.

METHODS

The Follow-up Automatically versus As-Needed Comparison (FAAN-C, or "fancy") trial is a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Children who are hospitalized for pneumonia, urinary tract infection, skin and soft tissue infection, or acute gastroenteritis are eligible to participate. Participants are randomized to an as-needed versus automatic posthospitalization follow-up recommendation. The sample size estimate is 2674 participants and the primary outcome is all-cause hospital readmission within 14 days of discharge. Secondary outcomes are medical interventions and child health-related quality of life. Analyses will be conducted in an intention-to-treat manner, testing noninferiority of as-needed follow-up compared with automatic follow-up.

DISCUSSION

FAAN-C will elucidate the relative benefits of an as-needed versus automatic follow-up recommendation, informing one of the most common decisions faced by families of hospitalized children and their medical providers. Findings from FAAN-C will also have implications for national quality metrics and guidelines.

Removing the physician from the equation: Patient-controlled, home-based therapeutic drug self-monitoring of tacrolimus

The dosing of tacrolimus, which forms the backbone of immunosuppressive therapy after kidney transplantation, is complex. This is due to its variable pharmacokinetics (both between and within individual patients), narrow therapeutic index, and the severe consequences of over- and underexposure, which may cause toxicity and rejection, respectively. Tacrolimus is, therefore, routinely dosed by means of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). TDM is performed for as long as the transplant functions and frequent and often lifelong sampling is therefore the rule. This puts a significant burden on patients and transplant professionals and is associated with high healthcare-associated costs. Furthermore, by its very nature, TDM is reactive and has no predictive power. Finally, the current practice of TDM does not foresee in an active role for patients themselves. Rather, the physician or pharmacist prescribes the next tacrolimus dose after obtaining the concentration measurement test results. In this article, we propose a strategy of patient-controlled, home-based, self-TDM of the immunosuppressant tacrolimus after transplantation. We argue that with the combined use of population tacrolimus pharmacokinetic models, home-based sampling by means of dried blood spotting and implementation of telemedicine, this may become a feasible approach in the near future.

Acceptability of Using a Decision Aid to Support Family Carers of People With Dementia Towards the End of Life: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVES

To explore the experiences, acceptability and utility of a decision aid for family carers of people with dementia towards the end of life.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with a sample of family carers enroled into a 6-month feasibility study in England, sampling to gain a range of experiences and views, based on relationship to person they cared for (e.g., spouse, adult child), age, gender, and self-reported use of the decision aid during the feasibility study. Interviews were conducted in March 2021-July 2021 and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. We used COREQ checklist to report our methods and results.

RESULTS

Family carers found the decision aid acceptable, describing it as comprehensive, accessible with relevant information and its presentation enabled good engagement. Experiences of the decision aid covered four main themes which demonstrated the perceived acceptability and utility: 1. A source of support and reassurance; 2. Empowering conversations and confidence; 3. Including the person living with dementia; and 4. Breaking down complexity.

CONCLUSIONS

An aid focussing on decisions about dementia end of life care supported family carers break down complex and emotive decisions, not only with making decisions in the moment but also in future planning.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Our three Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) members (all former family carers) were crucial throughout the wider study. PPI supported development of the topic guides, supported trialling the topic guide and interview procedures and finally supported the development of themes as part of the analysis.

Limited Evidence of Shared Decision Making for Prostate Cancer Screening in Audio-Recorded Primary Care Visits Among Black Men and their Healthcare Providers

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based prostate cancer screening is a preference-sensitive decision for which experts recommend a shared decision making (SDM) approach. This study aimed to examine PSA screening SDM in primary care. Methods included qualitative analysis of audio-recorded patient-provider interactions supplemented by quantitative description. Participants included 5 clinic providers and 13 patients who were: (1) 40-69 years old, (2) Black, (3) male, and (4) attending clinic for routine primary care. Main measures were SDM element themes and "observing patient involvement in decision making" (OPTION) scoring. Some discussions addressed advantages, disadvantages, and/or scientific uncertainty of screening, however, few patients received all SDM elements. Nearly all providers recommended screening, however, only 3 patients were directly asked about screening preferences. Few patients were asked about prostate cancer knowledge (2), urological symptoms (3), or family history (6). Most providers discussed disadvantages (80%) and advantages (80%) of PSA screening. Average OPTION score was 25/100 (range 0-67) per provider. Our study found limited SDM during PSA screening consultations. The counseling that did take place utilized components of SDM but inconsistently and incompletely. We must improve SDM for PSA screening for diverse patient populations to promote health equity. This study highlights the need to improve SDM for PSA screening.

Communicating cardiovascular risk: Systematic review of qualitative evidence

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular risk prediction models are widely used to help individuals understand risk and make decisions.

METHODS

Systematic review of qualitative evidence. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL. We included English-language qualitative studies on the communication of cardiovascular risk. We assessed study quality using Hawker et al.'s tool and synthesised data thematically.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies were included. Many patients think that risk scores are of limited practical value. Other sources of information feed into informal estimates of risk, which may lead patients to reject the results of clinical risk assessment when the two conflict. Clinicians identify a number of barriers to risk communication, including patients' limited understanding of risk and excessive anxiety. They use a range of strategies for adapting risk communication. Both clinicians and individuals express specific preferences for risk communication formats.

DISCUSSION

Ways of communicating risk that provide some comparison or reference point seem more promising. The broader context of communication around risk may be more important than the risk scoring instrument. Risk communication interventions, in practice, may be more about appeals to emotion than a rationalistic model of decision-making.

The Dental Practicality Index - to treat or not to treat

The Dental Practicality Index (DPI) has been designed to describe, on a clinical level, the 'practicality' of restoring a tooth versus referring to secondary care or extraction.The systematic approach of DPI has been shown to improve decision-making and confidence in treatment planning when used by young dentists. In addition, there is good evidence demonstrating that it provides an accurate estimation of the outcome of treatment. The DPI enhances clinician-patient communication and ultimately the consent process.

The development and validation of a decision aid to enhance shared decision-making for the management of actinic keratosis

Actinic keratoses (AKs) are common pre-malignant lesions. There are numerous management options including active surveillance, multiple topical therapies, cryotherapy, curettage and cautery, and photodynamic therapy, each with their own risks, benefits and efficacy. Best practice currently involves shared decision-making between patient and clinician, particularly in the setting of multiple management options. Patient decision aids have been shown to be beneficial in the shared decision-making process. In view of this, we have developed and validated a decision aid for the management of AKs, in concordance with the International Patient Decision Aids Standards.

Exploring shared decision-making needs in lung cancer screening among high-risk groups and health care providers in China: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The intricate balance between the advantages and risks of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) impedes the utilization of lung cancer screening (LCS). Guiding shared decision-making (SDM) for well-informed choices regarding LCS is pivotal. There has been a notable increase in research related to SDM. However, these studies possess limitations. For example, they may ignore the identification of decision support and needs from the perspective of health care providers and high-risk groups. Additionally, these studies have not adequately addressed the complete SDM process, including pre-decisional needs, the decision-making process, and post-decision experiences. Furthermore, the East-West divide of SDM has been largely ignored. This study aimed to explore the decisional needs and support for shared decision-making for LCS among health care providers and high-risk groups in China.

METHODS

Informed by the Ottawa Decision-Support Framework, we conducted qualitative, face-to-face in-depth interviews to explore shared decision-making among 30 lung cancer high-risk individuals and 9 health care providers. Content analysis was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 4 decisional needs that impair shared decision-making: (1) LCS knowledge deficit; (2) inadequate supportive resources; (3) shared decision-making conceptual bias; and (4) delicate doctor-patient bonds. We identified 3 decision supports: (1) providing information throughout the LCS process; (2) providing shared decision-making decision coaching; and (3) providing decision tools.

CONCLUSIONS

This study offers valuable insights into the decisional needs and support required to undergo LCS among high-risk individuals and perspectives from health care providers. Future studies should aim to design interventions that enhance the quality of shared decision-making by offering LCS information, decision tools for LCS, and decision coaching for shared decision-making (e.g., through community nurses). Simultaneously, it is crucial to assess individuals' needs for effective deliberation to prevent conflicts and regrets after arriving at a decision.

Patient-Centered Adult Cardiovascular Care: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Patient-centered care is gaining widespread acceptance by the medical and lay communities and is increasingly recognized as a goal of high-quality health care delivery. Patient-centered care is based on ethical principles and aims at establishing a partnership between the health care team and patient, family member, or both in the care planning and decision-making process. Patient-centered care involves providing respectful care by tailoring management decisions to patients' beliefs, preferences, and values. A collaborative care approach can enhance patient engagement, foster shared decision-making that aligns with patient values and goals, promote more personalized and effective cardiovascular care, and potentially improve patient outcomes. The objective of this scientific statement is to inform health care professionals and stakeholders about the role and impact of patient-centered care in adult cardiovascular medicine. This scientific statement describes the background and rationale for patient-centered care in cardiovascular medicine, provides insight into patient-oriented medication management and patient-reported outcome measures, highlights opportunities and strategies to overcome challenges in patient-centered care, and outlines knowledge gaps and future directions.

Shared decision-making for supporting women's decisions about breast cancer screening

BACKGROUND

In breast cancer screening programmes, women may have discussions with a healthcare provider to help them decide whether or not they wish to join the breast cancer screening programme. This process is called shared decision-making (SDM) and involves discussions and decisions based on the evidence and the person's values and preferences. SDM is becoming a recommended approach in clinical guidelines, extending beyond decision aids. However, the overall effect of SDM in women deciding to participate in breast cancer screening remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of SDM on women's satisfaction, confidence, and knowledge when deciding whether to participate in breast cancer screening.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 8 August 2023. We also screened abstracts from two relevant conferences from 2020 to 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs assessing interventions targeting various components of SDM. The focus was on supporting women aged 40 to 75 at average or above-average risk of breast cancer in their decision to participate in breast cancer screening.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and conducted data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence. Review outcomes included satisfaction with the decision-making process, confidence in the decision made, knowledge of all options, adherence to the chosen option, women's involvement in SDM, woman-clinician communication, and mental health.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 19 studies with 64,215 randomised women, mostly with an average to moderate risk of breast cancer. Two studies covered all aspects of SDM; six examined shortened forms of SDM involving communication on risks and personal values; and 11 focused on enhanced communication of risk without other SDM aspects. SDM involving all components compared to control The two eligible studies did not assess satisfaction with the SDM process or confidence in the decision. Based on a single study, SDM showed uncertain effects on participant knowledge regarding the age to start screening (risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 2.28; 133 women; very low certainty evidence) and frequency of testing (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.04; 133 women; very low certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured. Abbreviated forms of SDM with clarification of values and preferences compared to control Of the six included studies, none evaluated satisfaction with the SDM process. These interventions may reduce conflict in the decision made, based on two measures, Decisional Conflict Scale scores (mean difference (MD) -1.60, 95% CI -4.21 to 0.87; conflict scale from 0 to 100; 4 studies; 1714 women; very low certainty evidence) and the proportion of women with residual conflict compared to control at one to three months' follow-up (rate of women with a conflicted decision, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.99; 1 study; 1001 women, very low certainty evidence). Knowledge of all options was assessed through knowledge scores and informed choice. The effect of SDM may enhance knowledge (MDs ranged from 0.47 to 1.44 higher scores on a scale from 0 to 10; 5 studies; 2114 women; low certainty evidence) and may lead to higher rates of informed choice (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.63; 4 studies; 2449 women; low certainty evidence) compared to control at one to three months' follow-up. These interventions may result in little to no difference in anxiety (MD 0.54, 95% -0.96 to 2.14; scale from 20 to 80; 2 studies; 749 women; low certainty evidence) and the number of women with worries about cancer compared to control at four to six weeks' follow-up (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.06; 1 study, 639 women; low certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured. Enhanced communication about risks without other SDM aspects compared to control Of 11 studies, three did not report relevant outcomes for this review, and none assessed satisfaction with the SDM process. Confidence in the decision made was measured by decisional conflict and anticipated regret of participating in screening or not. These interventions, without addressing values and preferences, may result in lower confidence in the decision compared to regular communication strategies at two weeks' follow-up (MD 2.89, 95% CI -2.35 to 8.14; Decisional Conflict Scale from 0 to 100; 2 studies; 1191 women; low certainty evidence). They may result in higher anticipated regret if participating in screening (MD 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.41) and lower anticipated regret if not participating in screening (MD -0.28, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.14). These interventions increase knowledge (MD 1.14, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.62; scale from 0 to 10; 4 studies; 2510 women; high certainty evidence), while it is unclear if there is a higher rate of informed choice compared to regular communication strategies at two to four weeks' follow-up (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.92; 2 studies; 1805 women; low certainty evidence). These interventions result in little to no difference in anxiety (MD 0.33, 95% CI -1.55 to 0.99; scale from 20 to 80) and depression (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.45; scale from 0 to 21; 2 studies; 1193 women; high certainty evidence) and lower cancer worry compared to control (MD -0.17, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.08; scale from 1 to 4; 1 study; 838 women; high certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Studies using abbreviated forms of SDM and other forms of enhanced communications indicated improvements in knowledge and reduced decisional conflict. However, uncertainty remains about the effect of SDM on supporting women's decisions. Most studies did not evaluate outcomes considered important for this review topic, and those that did measured different concepts. High-quality randomised trials are needed to evaluate SDM in diverse cultural settings with a focus on outcomes such as women's satisfaction with choices aligned to their values.

Implementing a shared decision-making intervention to support treatment decisions for patients following an anterior cruciate ligament rupture - a protocol for the POP-ACLR feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Treatment for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture may follow a surgical or nonsurgical pathway. At present, there is uncertainty around treatment choice. Two shared decision-making tools have been codesigned to support patients to make a decision about treatment following an ACL rupture. The shared decision-making tools include a patient information leaflet and an option grid. We report the protocol for a mixed-methods feasibility study, with nested qualitative interviews, to understand feasibility, acceptability, indicators of effectiveness and implementation factors of these shared decision-making tools (combined to form one shared decision-making intervention).

METHODS

A single-centre non-randomised feasibility study will be conducted with 20 patients. Patients diagnosed with an ACL rupture following magnetic resonance imaging will be identified from an orthopaedic clinic. The shared decision-making intervention will be delivered during a clinical consultation with a physiotherapist. The primary feasibility outcomes include the following: recruitment rate, fidelity, acceptability and follow-up questionnaire completion. The secondary outcome is the satisfaction with decision scale. The nested qualitative interview will explore experience of using the shared decision-making intervention to understand acceptability, implementation factors and areas for further refinement.

DISCUSSION

This study will determine the feasibility of using a newly developed shared decision-making intervention designed to support patients to make a decision about treatment of their ACL rupture. The acceptability and indicators of effectiveness will also be explored. In the long term, the shared decision-making intervention may improve service and patient outcomes and ensure cost-effectiveness for the NHS; ensuring those most likely to benefit from surgical treatment proceed along this pathway.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Pending registration on ISRCTN.

Associations between knowledge of health issues and health care satisfaction and propensity to complain: a cross-sectional survey of adult men in Denmark

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to investigate associations between knowledge of health issues and healthcare satisfaction and propensity to complain including the association between knowledge and greater patient involvement.

DESIGN

The present study is a secondary analysis of a larger cross-sectional case vignette survey.

SETTING

Survey conducted in adult Danish men.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants included 6755 men aged 45-70 years.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants responded to a survey with scenarios illustrating prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and different information provision.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Using Likert scales (scored 1-5), participants rated their satisfaction with the care described and their inclination to complain and responded to a short quiz (scored 0-3) assessing their knowledge about the PSA test.

RESULTS

Satisfaction with healthcare increased with better quiz performance (Likert difference 0.13 (95% CI .07 to 0.20), p <0.001, totally correct vs totally incorrect responders) and correspondingly, the desire to complain significantly decreased (Likert difference -0.34 (95% CI 0.40 to -0.27), p <0.001). Respondents with higher education performed better (mean quiz score difference 0.59 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.67), p <0.001, most educated vs least educated). Responders who received information about the PSA test generally performed better (quiz score difference 0.41 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.47), p<0.001, neutral vs no information). Overestimation of PSA merits was more common than underestimation (7.9% vs 3.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Mens' knowledge of the benefits of screening varies with education, predicts satisfaction with care and the desire to complain, and may be improved through greater involvement in decision-making.

Severe Fetal CAKUT (Congenital Anomalies of the Kidneys and Urinary Tract), Prenatal Consultations, and Initiation of Neonatal Dialysis

INTRODUCTION

 Pediatric nephrology prenatal consultations for congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract (CAKUT) and criteria for kidney replacement therapy initiation in neonatal end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) are not well described. We evaluated pediatric nephrology approaches to prenatal CAKUT counseling and neonatal dialysis initiation.

METHODS

 A 35-question Qualtrics survey was distributed via the North American Pediatric Renal Trials and Collaborative Studies email list between January and March 2021. Thirty-nine pediatric nephrology centers completed the survey.

RESULTS

 All but one responding center (n = 38) provide prenatal CAKUT consultations and neonatal dialysis, with wide variability in reported multispecialty involvement. Nearly half (47%) of centers utilize written/unwritten criteria for offering neonatal dialysis. The most common contraindications to neonatal dialysis were parental refusal (61%), contraindication to access placement by surgeons (55%), and birth weight (BW) contraindication (55%, with < 1,500 g being the most common BW contraindication). Overall, 79% of centers reported caring for < 5 neonates with ESKD in the past year, 61% use hemodialysis therapies prior to peritoneal dialysis in neonates requiring dialysis, and 100% transition to peritoneal dialysis by hospital discharge.

CONCLUSION

 Many pediatric nephrology programs provide prenatal CAKUT consultations and neonatal dialysis, but with variability in practice approach. Further multicenter research regarding prenatal consultations and neonatal dialysis outcomes is necessary to further improve care delivery to this population.

Better Conversations for Better Informed Consent: Talking with Surgical Patients

For more than sixty years, surgeons have used bioethical strategies to promote patient self-determination, many of these now collectively described as "informed consent." Yet the core framework-understanding, risks, benefits, and alternatives-fails to support patients in deliberation about treatment. We find that surgeons translate this framework into an overly complicated technical explanation of disease and treatment and an overly simplified narrative that surgery will "fix" the problem. They omit critical information about the goals and downsides of surgery and present untenable options as a matter of patient choice. We propose a novel framework called "better conversations." Herein, surgeons provide context about clinical norms, establish the goals of surgery, and comprehensively delineate the downsides of surgery to generate a deliberative space for patients to consider whether surgery is right for them. This paradigm shift meets the standards for informed consent, supports deliberation, and allows patients to anticipate and prepare for the experience of treatment.

Feasibility Testing of a Web-Based Reproductive Decision Support Tool for Cystic Fibrosis

BACKGROUND

People with cystic fibrosis (CF) are increasingly considering their reproductive goals. We developed MyVoice:CF, a web-based patient-centered reproductive decision support tool and assessed its implementation in CF care.

METHODS

We conducted a feasibility trial among 18-44-year-old women with CF and multidisciplinary CF providers. Prior to CF clinic visit, patient participants completed a baseline survey, used MyVoice:CF, and assessed acceptability, appropriateness, and usability. After clinic, participants rated impact on reproductive health communication. At 3 months post-use, participants assessed impact on reproductive health outcomes. Provider participants completed a survey and focus group regarding MyVoice:CF feasibility/implementation. We assessed outcomes descriptively. We compared MyVoice:CF's impact on outcomes from baseline to follow-up using McNemar's and Wilcoxon signed rank tests as appropriate.

RESULTS

Forty-three patient participants completed baseline surveys and 40 rated MyVoice:CF's feasibility; 10 providers participated. Patient participants rated MyVoice:CF's acceptability as 4.48±0.50 out of 5, appropriateness as 4.61±0.48 out of 5, and usability as 82.25±11.02 ('A'/excellent). After MyVoice:CF use, participants reported improved reproductive health communication self-efficacy vs. baseline (3.54±1.17vs.3.95±0.93, p<0.001). At baseline, 36% of participants reported any discussion of reproductive goals/plans with their CF team in the past year compared to 59% after first visit post-MyVoice:CF use (p=0.049). Provider participants similarly rated MyVoice:CF as feasible and reported no negative impacts on clinic flow after implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

MyVoice:CF is acceptable, appropriate, and usable for those with CF. Preliminary effectiveness evaluation suggests that MyVoice:CF improves self-efficacy in and frequency of reproductive health communication. Future studies should further assess MyVoice:CF's impact on reproductive health communication and outcomes.

Primary care patient interests in joining a planned multi-cancer early detection clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Clinical trials are being conducted and are being planned to assess the safety and efficacy of multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests for use in cancer screening. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of primary care patient outreach in recruiting participants to a planned MCED clinical trial, assess patient interest in trial participation, and measure decisional conflict related to participation.

METHODS

The research team used the electronic medical record of a large, urban health care system to identify primary care patients 50-80 years of age who were potentially eligible for a planned MCED trial. We mailed information about the planned MCED trial to identified patients and then contacted the patients by telephone to obtain consent and administer a baseline survey. Subsequently, we contacted consented patients to complete an interview to review the mailed information and elicit perceptions about trial participation. Finally, a research coordinator administered an endpoint telephone survey to assess patient interest in and decisional conflict related to joining the trial.

RESULTS

We randomly identified 1000 eligible patients and were able to make contact with 690 (69%) by telephone. Of the patients contacted, 217 (31%) completed the decision counseling session and 219 (32%) completed the endpoint survey. Among endpoint survey respondents, 177 (81%) expressed interest in joining the MCED trial and 162 (74%) reported low decisional conflict.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients were contacted and about a quarter of those contacted expressed interest in and low decisional conflict about joining the planned MCED trial. Research is needed to determine how to optimize patient outreach and engage patients in shared decision-making about MCED trial participation.

Prostate Cancer Foundation Screening Guidelines for Black Men in the United States

BACKGROUND

In the United States, Black men are at highest risk for being diagnosed with and dying from prostate cancer. Given this disparity, we examined relevant data to establish clinical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening guidelines for Black men in the United States.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search identified 1848 unique publications for screening. Of those screened, 287 studies were selected for full-text review, and 264 were considered relevant and form the basis for these guidelines. The numbers were reported according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials provided Level 1 evidence that regular PSA screening of men 50 to 74 years of age of average risk reduced metastasis and prostate cancer death at 16 to 22 years of follow-up. The best available evidence specifically for Black men comes from observational and modeling studies that consider age to obtain a baseline PSA, frequency of testing, and age when screening should end. Cohort studies suggest that discussions about baseline PSA testing between Black men and their clinicians should begin in the early 40s, and data from modeling studies indicate prostate cancer develops 3 to 9 years earlier in Black men compared with non-Black men. Lowering the age for baseline PSA testing to 40 to 45 years of age from 50 to 55 years of age, followed by regular screening until 70 years of age (informed by PSA values and health factors), could reduce prostate cancer mortality in Black men (approximately 30% relative risk reduction) without substantially increasing overdiagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines recommend that Black men should obtain information about PSA screening for prostate cancer. Among Black men who elect screening, baseline PSA testing should occur between ages 40 and 45. Depending on PSA value and health status, annual screening should be strongly considered. (Supported by the Prostate Cancer Foundation.).

Effectiveness of interventions to enhance shared decision-making in wound care: A systematic review

AIMS

To explore the effectiveness of interventions to enhance patient participation in shared decision-making in wound care and tissue viability.

BACKGROUND

Caring for people living with a wound is complex due to interaction between wound healing, symptoms, psychological wellbeing and treatment effectiveness. To respond to this complexity, there has been recent emphasis on the importance of delivering patient centred wound care and shared decision-making to personalise health care. However, little is known about the effectiveness of existing interventions to support shared decision-making in wound care.

DESIGN

Systematic review of interventional studies to enhance shared decision-making in wound care or tissue viability. This was reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines 2020.

METHODS

Interventional primary research studies published in English up to January 2023 were included. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were undertaken independently by two authors.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails (trials database), CINAHL, British Nursing Index (BNI), WorldCat (thesis database), Scopus and registries of ongoing studies (ISRCTN registry and clinicaltrials.gov).

RESULTS

1063 abstracts were screened, and eight full-text studies included. Findings indicate, interventions to support shared decision-making are positively received. Goal or need setting components may assist knowledge transfer between patient and clinician, and could lower short term decisional conflict. However, generally findings within this study had very low certainty due to the inconsistencies in outcomes reported, and the variation and complexity of single and multiple interventions used.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research on shared decision-making interventions in wound care should include the involvement of stakeholders and programme theory to underpin the interventions developed to consider the complexity of interventions.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE

Patients setting out their needs or goals and exploring patient questions are important and should be considered in clinical care.

REGISTRATION

The review protocol was prospectively registered (PROSPERO database: CRD42023389820).

NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Not applicable as this is a systematic review.

Maternity healthcare professionals' experiences of supporting women in decision-making for labour and birth: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

To explore and characterise maternity healthcare professionals' (MHCPs) experience and practice of shared decision-making (SDM), to inform policy, research and practice development.

DESIGN

Qualitative focus group study.

SETTING

Large Maternity Unit in the Southwest of England.

PARTICIPANTS

MHCPs who give information relating to clinical procedures and pregnancy care relating to labour and birth and are directly involved in decision-making conversations were purposively sampled to ensure representation across MHCP groups.

DATA COLLECTION

A semistructured topic guide was used.

DATA ANALYSIS

Reflexive thematic analysis was undertaken.

RESULTS

Seven focus groups were conducted, comprising a total of 24 participants (3-5 per group). Two themes were developed: contextualising decision-making and controversies in current decision-making. Contextual factors that influenced decision-making practices included lack of time and challenges faced in intrapartum care. MHCPs reported variation in how they approach decision-making conversations and asked for more training on how to consistently achieve SDM. There were communication challenges with women who did not speak English. Three controversies were explored: the role of prior clinical experience, the validity of informed consent when women were in pain and during life-threatening emergencies and instances where women declined medical advice.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that MHCPs are committed to SDM but need better support to deliver it. Structured processes including Core Information Sets, communication skills training and decision support aids may help to consistently deliver SDM in maternity care.

Prevalence and determinants of shared decision-making for PSA testing in the United States

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing but appears underutilized. This population-based study assessed the prevalence and determinants of SDM for PSA testing among US men.

METHODS

We assessed PSA testing rates and SDM engagement in men aged 40 and older without prostate cancer history using the 2019 National Health Interview Survey. SDM was defined as discussing the advantages and disadvantages of PSA testing with a physician. We used multivariable logistic regression with machine learning to identify factors associated with lack of SDM.

RESULTS

Among 9723 eligible participants (mean age 58 years), lifetime PSA testing prevalence was 45.9% and the 1-year testing incidence was 29.1%. Only 24.1% reported engaging in SDM with a physician, while 62.9% never discussed PSA testing. Younger age and lower education levels were the primary determinants of decreased SDM engagement. Men with less education engaged in SDM less than half as often as those with higher education levels across all age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Societal guidelines recommend SDM for PSA testing. However, most men, regardless of age, have never engaged in SDM conversations with a healthcare provider about PSA testing, especially those with less education. More efforts are needed to improve patient-provider conversations about the potential benefits and harms of PSA testing.

Language in Bioethics: Beyond the Representational View

Though assumptions about language underlie all bioethical work, the field has rarely partaken of theories of language. This article encourages a more linguistically engaged bioethics. We describe the tacit conception of language that is frequently upheld in bioethics-what we call the representational view, which sees language essentially as a means of description. We examine how this view has routed the field's theories and interventions down certain paths. We present an alternative model of language-the pragmatic view-and explore how it expands and clarifies traditional bioethical concerns. To lend concreteness, we apply the pragmatic view to a pervasive concept in bioethics and adjacent fields: decision making. We suggest that problems of the decision-making approach to bioethical issues are grounded in adherence to the representational view. Drawing on empirical work in surgery and critical care, we show how the pragmatic view productively reframes bioethical questions about how medical treatments are pursued.

Empowering patients in primary care: a qualitative exploration of the usability and utility of an online diabetes self-management tool

BACKGROUND

Despite the potential advantages of Internet-based diabetes self-management education, its adoption was not widespread among Singapore's public primary care clinics (polyclinics). An interactive online tool was thus developed to help educate patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and was now ready for user testing before implementation.

AIM

To explore the perceived utility and usability of the educational tool in patients with suboptimally-controlled T2DM in a Singapore primary care setting.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were used to gather qualitative data from multi-ethnic Asian adults who had suboptimally-controlled T2DM. A total of 17 IDIs were conducted between April 2022 to March 2023, audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to identify emergent themes via thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Regarding utility, users found the educational tool useful because it provided them with information that was comprehensive, accessible, reliable, and manageable. Regarding usability, the majority of users reported that the educational tool was easy to use, and suggested ways to improve navigational cues, visual clarity, readability and user engagement.

CONCLUSION

Participants generally found the educational tool useful and easy to use. A revised educational tool will be developed based on their feedback and implemented in clinical practice.

Improving medication prescribing-related outcomes for vulnerable elderly in transitions on high-risk medications (IMPROVE-IT HRM): a pilot randomized trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Seniors with recurrent hospitalizations who are taking multiple medications including high-risk medications are at particular risk for serious adverse medication events. We will assess whether an expert Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology (CPT) medication management intervention during hospitalization with follow-up post-discharge and communication with circle of care is feasible and can decrease drug therapy problems amongst this group.

METHODS

The design is a pragmatic pilot randomized trial with 1:1 patient-level concealed randomization with blinded outcome assessment and data analysis. Participants will be adults 65 years and older admitted to internal medicine services for more than 2 days, who have had at least one other hospitalization in the prior year, taking five or more chronic medications including at least one high-risk medication. The CPT intervention identifies medication targets; completes consult, including priorities for improving prescribing negotiated with the patient; starts the care plan; ensures a detailed discharge medication reconciliation and circle-of-care communication; and sees the patient at least twice after hospital discharge via virtual visits to consolidate the care plan in the community. Control group receives usual care. Primary outcomes are feasibility - recruitment, retention, costs, and clinical - number of drug therapy problems improved, with secondary outcomes examining coordination of transitions in care, quality of life, and healthcare utilization and costs. Follow-up is to 3-month posthospital discharge.

DISCUSSION

If results support feasibility of ramp-up and promising clinical outcomes, a follow-up definitive trial will be organized using a developing national platform and medication appropriateness network. Since the intervention allows a very scarce medical specialty expertise to be offered via virtual care, there is potential to improve the safety, outcomes, and cost of care widely.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04077281.

Low-value chronic prescription of acid reducing medication among Dutch general practitioners: impact of a patient education intervention

BACKGROUND

Dyspepsia is a commonly encountered clinical condition in Dutch general practice, which is often treated through the prescription of acid-reducing medication (ARM). However, recent studies indicate that the majority of chronic ARM users lack an indication for their use and that their long-term use is associated with adverse outcomes. We developed a patient-focussed educational intervention aiming to reduce low-value (chronic) use of ARM.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled study, and evaluated its effect on the low-value chronic prescription of ARM using data from a subset (n = 26) of practices from the Nivel Primary Care Database. The intervention involved distributing an educational waiting room posters and flyers informing both patients and general practitioners (GPs) regarding the appropriate indications for prescription of an ARM for dyspepsia, which also referred to an online decision aid. The interventions' effect was evaluated through calculation of the odds ratio of a patient receiving a low-value chronic ARM prescription over the second half of 2021 and 2022 (i.e. pre-intervention vs. post-intervention).

RESULTS

In both the control and intervention groups, the proportion of patients receiving chronic low-value ARM prescriptions slightly increased. In the control group, it decreased from 50.3% in 2021 to 49.7% in 2022, and in the intervention group it increased from 51.3% in 2021 to 53.1% in 2022. Subsequent statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in low-value chronic prescriptions between the control and intervention groups (Odds ratio: 1.11 [0.84-1.47], p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our educational intervention did not result in a change in the low-value chronic prescription of ARM; approximately half of the patients of the intervention and control still received low-value chronic ARM prescriptions. The absence of effect might be explained by selection bias of participating practices, awareness on the topic of chronic AMR prescriptions and the relative low proportion of low-value chronic ARM prescribing in the intervention as well as the control group compared to an assessment conducted two years prior.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

10/31/2023 NCT06108817.

Aids to improve understanding of statistical risk in patients consenting for surgery and interventional procedures: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Informed consent is an essential process in clinical decision-making, through which healthcare providers educate patients about benefits, risks, and alternatives of a procedure. Statistical risk information is difficult to communicate and the effectiveness of aids aimed at supporting this type of communication is uncertain. This systematic review aims to study the impact of risk communication adjuncts on patients' understanding of statistical risk in surgery and interventional procedures.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed across Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science until July 2021 with a repeated search in September 2022. RCTs and observational studies examining risk communication tools (e.g., information leaflets and audio-video) in adult (age >16) patients undergoing a surgical or interventional procedure were included. Primary outcomes included the objective assessment of statistical risk recall. Secondary outcomes included patient attitudes with respect to statistical information. Due to the study heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 4348 articles were identified, and following abstract and full-text screening 14 articles, including 9 RCTs, were included. The total number of adult patients was 1513. The most common risk communication tool used was written information (n = 7). Most RCTs (7/9, 77.8%) showed statistically significant improvements in patient understanding of statistical risk in the intervention group. Quality assessment found some concerns with all RCTs.

CONCLUSION

Risk communication tools appear to improve recall of statistical risk. Additional prospective trials comparing various aids simultaneously are warranted to determine the most effective method of improving understanding.

Decision aids for cancer survivors' engagement with survivorship care services after primary treatment: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To elucidate existing decision aids (DAs) in supporting cancer survivors' decisions to engage in cancer survivorship care services after primary treatment. Secondary objectives are to assess the DA acceptability, impact of DAs, and implementation barriers.

METHODS

Databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL) were searched to collect publications from inception through September 2021. Studies describing the development or evaluation of DAs used for survivorship care services after primary cancer treatment were included. Article selection and critical appraisal were conducted independently by two authors.

RESULTS

We included 16 studies that described 13 DAs and addressed multiple survivorship care domains: prevention of recurrence/new cancers in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors and breast cancer gene mutation carriers, family building options, health insurance plans, health promotion (substance use behavior, cardiovascular disease risk reduction), advanced care planning, and post-treatment follow-up intensity. The electronic format was used to design most DAs for self-administration. The content presentation covered decisional context, options, and value clarification exercises. DAs were acceptable and associated with higher knowledge but presented inconclusive decisional outcomes. Implementation barriers included lack of design features for connectivity to care, low self-efficacy, and low perceived DA usefulness among healthcare professionals. Other survivor characteristics included age, literacy, preferred timing, and setting.

CONCLUSIONS

A diverse range of DAs exists in survivorship care services engagement with favorable knowledge outcomes. Future work should clarify the impact of DAs on decisional outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

DA characterization and suggestions for prospective developers could enhance support for cancer survivors encountering complex decisions throughout the survivorship continuum.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of preoperative predictors for early mortality following hip fracture surgery

Hip fractures are a global health problem with a high postoperative mortality rate. Preoperative predictors for early mortality could be used to optimise and personalise healthcare strategies. This study aimed to identify predictors for early mortality following hip fracture surgery. Cohort studies examining independent preoperative predictors for mortality following hip fracture surgery were identified through a systematic search on Scopus and PubMed. Predictors for 30-day mortality were the primary outcome, and predictors for mortality within 1 year were secondary outcomes. Primary outcomes were analysed with random-effects meta-analyses. Confidence in the cumulative evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria. Secondary outcomes were synthesised narratively. Thirty-three cohort studies involving 462,699 patients were meta-analysed. Five high-quality evidence predictors for 30-day mortality were identified: age per year (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.04-1.07), ASA score ≥ 3 (OR: 2.69, 95% CI: 2.12-3.42), male gender (OR: 2.00, 95% CI: 1.85-2.18), institutional residence (OR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.31-2.49), and metastatic cancer (OR: 2.83, 95% CI: 2.58-3.10). Additionally, six moderate-quality evidence predictors were identified: chronic renal failure, dementia, diabetes, low haemoglobin, heart failures, and a history of any malignancy. Weak evidence was found for non-metastatic cancer. This review found relevant preoperative predictors which could be used to identify patients who are at high risk of 30-day mortality following hip fracture surgery. For some predictors, the prognostic value could be increased by further subcategorising the conditions by severity.

Aide à la décision pour le dépistage du cancer du sein: Étude de cas pré-test/post-test

Les lignes directrices canadiennes recommandent la prise de décision partagée aux femmes de moins de 50 ans qui envisagent de passer des examens de dépistage du cancer du sein. Les infirmières peuvent les épauler dans le processus de décision. La présente étude de cas, menée selon une approche pré-test/post-test auprès d’une seule participante, a mesuré le changement survenu dans le conflit décisionnel vécu par une femme de moins de 50 ans ayant reçu du soutien à la décision pour choisir de subir ou non une mammographie de dépistage. Avant l’étude, cette femme, âgée de 44 ans, présentait un risque de cancer du sein dans la moyenne et vivait un conflit décisionnel. Elle a obtenu un score de 1 sur 4 au test SURE, indiquant qu’elle n’était pas bien informée, que ses valeurs n’étaient pas clairement définies et qu’elle ne se sentait pas bien soutenue. Après avoir reçu le soutien d’une infirmière formée pour l’aider à choisir de procéder ou non à une mammographie de dépistage du cancer du sein, elle a obtenu un score de 4 au test SURE, un signe d’absence de conflit décisionnel. La participante a gagné la confiance nécessaire pour prendre une décision éclairée qui respecte ses valeurs, le soutien à la décision lui ayant permis d’améliorer ses connaissances et d’apaiser son conflit décisionnel.

Healthcare Professionals' Perceptions about the Implementation of Shared Decision-Making in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study from a Virtual Community of Practice

Background

The incorporation of shared decision making (SDM) is a central part of empowerment processes, as it facilitates greater activation on the part of patients, increasing the likelihood of them gaining control over their healthcare and developing skills to solve their health problems. Despite these benefits, there are still difficulties in the implementation of SDM among healthcare professionals due to internal and external factors related to the context and health systems.

Aim

To explore primary care professionals (PCPs)' perceptions of the SDM model, based on their preconceptions and experience in clinical practice.

Methods

A framework analysis was conducted on qualitative data derived from a virtual community practice forum, within a cluster-randomized clinical trial developed in the e-MPODERA project.

Results

The most important points in the opinions of the PCPs were: exploring the patients' values, preferences and expectations, providing them with and checking their understanding of up-to-date and evidence-based health information. The analysis revealed three themes: determinants of the implementation process of SDM, lack of consistency and dilemmas and benefits of PCP active listening, motivation and positive expectations of SDM.

Discussion

In our initial analysis, we examined the connections between the categories of the TDC model and its application in the primary care context. The categories related to the model reflect the theoretical understanding of professionals, while those related to perceptions of its application and use show certain discrepancies. These discrepancies could indicate a lack of understanding of the model and its real-world implications or insufficient commitment on the part of professionals or the organization to ensure its effective implementation.

Conclusions

Specific targeted training that addresses knowledge, attitudes and practice may resolve the aforementioned findings.

Measure of Caregiver Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Knowledge Is Responsive to Decision Aid on Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

OBJECTIVE

Adapt and test a measure of knowledge for caregivers of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and evaluate the impact of the information component of a decision aid (DA) on participant knowledge.

METHODS

A set of seven knowledge items were created based on prior knowledge measures and clinical guidelines. As part of a larger cross-sectional survey study of caregivers of children diagnosed with ADHD, caregivers were randomized to one of two arms: 1) a DA arm, where participants reviewed the information component of the Cincinnati Children's Hospital's DA, and 2) a control arm, where participants were not shown a DA. All participants completed the seven knowledge items. Knowledge items were assessed for difficulty, quality of distractors, acceptability, and redundancy. Total knowledge scores (0-100) for the DA and control arm were compared.

RESULTS

Caregivers were assigned to the DA arm (n = 243) or the control arm (n = 260). All 7 knowledge items were retained as no items were too difficult or too easy, all response options were used, there were little missing data, and no items were redundant. The overall knowledge score was normally distributed, and almost covered the full range of scores (5-100). Those who received the DA component had higher knowledge scores (M=68, SD=23) than those who did not receive the DA component (M=60, SD=19, P < .01, d=0.4).

CONCLUSIONS

The Caregiver ADHD Knowledge (CAKe) measure was acceptable and demonstrated construct validity as those who were assigned to review the DA component demonstrated greater knowledge than those who were not assigned to review the DA component.

Qualitative Analysis of Patient Decisional Needs for Medications to Treat Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

The development of tools to support shared decision-making should be informed by patients' decisional needs and treatment preferences, which are largely unknown for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) pharmacotherapy decisions. We aimed to identify patients' decisional needs when considering HFrEF medication options.

METHODS

This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. We recruited patients with HFrEF from 2 Canadian ambulatory HF clinics and clinicians from Canadian HF guideline panels, HF clinics, and Canadian HF Society membership. We identified themes through inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants included 15 patients and 12 clinicians. Six themes and associated subthemes emerged related to HFrEF pharmacotherapy decision-making: (1) patient decisional needs included lack of awareness of a choice or options, difficult decision timing and stage, information overload, and inadequate motivation, support and resources; (2) patients' decisional conflict varied substantially, driven by unclear trade-offs; (3) treatment attribute preferences-patients focused on both benefits and downsides of treatment, whereas clinicians centered discussion on benefits; (4) quality of life-patients' definition of quality of life depended on pre-HF activity, though most patients demonstrated adaptability in adjusting their daily activities to manage HF; (5) shared decision-making process-clinicians' described a process more akin to informed consent; (6) decision support-multimedia decision aids, virtual appointments, and primary-care comanagement emerged as potential enablers of shared decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HFrEF have several decisional needs, which are consistent with those that may respond to decision aids. These findings can inform the development of HFrEF pharmacotherapy decision aids to address these decisional needs and facilitate shared decision-making.

Decision support for breast cancer screening decisions: A single case pre-/post-test study

Canadian guidelines recommend shared decision making for women less than 50 years old who are considering breast cancer screening. Nurses can support women in making these decisions. This single case pre-/post-test study measured change in decisional conflict after decision support for a woman less than 50 years old considering whether or not to initiate mammography screening. At baseline, a 44-year-old female at average risk of breast cancer was experiencing decisional conflict. She scored 1 out of 4 on the SURE test indicating feeling uninformed, unclear values, and inadequate support. After receiving decision coaching with a breast cancer screening decision aid by a nurse trained in decision coaching, she scored 4 on the SURE test indicating no decisional conflict. She reached an informed decision consistent with her values about mammography screening. Providing decisional support improved her knowledge, reduced her decisional conflict, and enhanced her confidence in making an informed decision that was consistent with her values.

Use of Persuasive Language in Communication of Risk during Prostate Cancer Treatment Consultations

BACKGROUND

Physician treatment preference may influence how risks are communicated in prostate cancer consultations. We identified persuasive language used when describing cancer prognosis, life expectancy, and side effects in relation to a physician's recommendation for aggressive (surgery/radiation) or nonaggressive (active surveillance/watchful waiting) treatment.

METHODS

A qualitative analysis was performed on transcribed treatment consultations of 40 men with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer across 10 multidisciplinary providers. Quotes pertaining to cancer prognosis, life expectancy, and side effects were randomized. Coders predicted physician treatment recommendations from isolated blinded quotes. Testing characteristics of consensus predictions against the physician's treatment recommendation were reported. Coders then identified persuasive strategies favoring aggressive/nonaggressive treatment for each quote. Frequencies of persuasive strategies favoring aggressive/nonaggressive treatment were reported. Logistic regression quantified associations between persuasive strategies and physician treatment recommendations.

RESULTS

A total of 496 quotes about cancer prognosis (n = 127), life expectancy (n = 51), and side effects (n = 318) were identified. The accuracy of predicting treatment recommendation based on individual quotes containing persuasive language (n = 256/496, 52%) was 91%. When favoring aggressive treatment, persuasive language downplayed side effect risks and amplified cancer risk (recurrence, progression, or mortality). Significant predictors (P < 0.05) of aggressive treatment recommendation included favorable side effect interpretation, downplaying side effects, and long time horizon for cancer risk due to longevity. When favoring nonaggressive treatment, persuasive language amplified side effect risks and downplayed cancer risk. Significant predictors of nonaggressive treatment recommendation included unfavorable side effect interpretation, favorable interpretation of cancer risk, and short time horizon for cancer risk due to longevity.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians use persuasive language favoring their preferred treatment, regardless of whether their recommendation is appropriate.

IMPLICATIONS

Clinicians should quantify risk so patients can judge potential harm without solely relying on persuasive language.

HIGHLIGHTS

Physicians use persuasive language favoring their treatment recommendation when communicating risks of prostate cancer treatment, which may influence a patient's treatment choice.Coders predicted physician treatment recommendations based on isolated, randomized quotes about cancer prognosis, life expectancy, and side effects with 91% accuracy.Qualitative analysis revealed that when favoring nonaggressive treatment, physicians used persuasive language that amplified side effect risks and downplayed cancer risk. When favoring aggressive treatment, physicians did the opposite.Providers should be cognizant of using persuasive strategies and aim to provide quantified assessments of risk that are jointly interpreted with the patient so that patients can make evidence-based conclusions regarding risks without solely relying on persuasive language.

Spine surgeons facing second opinions: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The social and technological mutation of our contemporary period disrupts the traditional dyad that prevails in the relationship between physicians and patients.

PURPOSE

The solicitation of a second opinion by the patient may potentially alter this dyad and degrade the mutual trust between the stakeholders concerned. The doctor-patient relationship has often been studied from the patient's perspective, but data are scarce from the spine surgeon's point of view.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This qualitative study used the grounded theory approach, an inductive methodology emphasizing field data and rejecting predetermined assumptions.

PATIENT SAMPLE

We interviewed spine surgeons of different ages, experiences, and practice locations. We initially contacted 30 practitioners, but the final number (24 interviews; 11 orthopedists and 13 neurosurgeons) was determined by data saturation (the point at which no new topics appeared).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Themes and subthemes were analyzed using semistructured interviews until saturation was reached.

METHODS

Data were collected through individual interviews, independently analyzed thematically using specialized software, and triangulated by three researchers (an anthropologist, psychiatrist, and neurosurgeon).

RESULTS

Index surgeons were defined when their patients went for a second opinion and recourse surgeons were defined as surgeons who were asked for a second opinion. Data analysis identified five overarching themes based on recurring elements in the interviews: (1) analysis of the patient's motivations for seeking a second opinion; (2) impaired trust and disloyalty; (3) ego, authority, and surgeon image; (4) management of a consultation recourse (measurement and ethics); and (5) the second opinion as an avoidance strategy. Despite the inherent asymmetry in the doctor-patient relationship, surgeons and patients share two symmetrical continua according to their perspective (professional or consumerist), involving power and control on the one hand and loyalty and autonomy on the other. These shared elements can be found in index consultations (seeking high-level care/respecting trust/closing the loyalty gap/managing disengagement) and referral consultations (objective and independent advice/trusting of the index advice/avoiding negative and anxiety-provoking situations).

CONCLUSIONS

The second opinion often has a negative connotation with spine surgeons, who see it as a breach of loyalty and trust, without neglecting ego injury in their relationship with the patient. A paradigm shift would allow the second opinion to be perceived as a valuable resource that broadens the physician-patient relationship and optimizes the shared surgical decision-making process.

Decision regret of cancer patients after radiotherapy: results from a cross-sectional observational study at a large tertiary cancer center in Germany

PURPOSE

The decision-making process regarding cancer treatment is emotionally challenging for patients and families, harboring the risk of decision regret. We aimed to explore prevalence and determinants of decision regret following radiotherapy.

METHODS

This cross-sectional observational study was conducted at a tertiary cancer center to assess decision regret following radiotherapy. The study employed the German version of the Ottawa Decision Regret Scale (DRS) which was validated in the study population. Decision regret was categorized as absent (0 points), mild (1-25 points), and strong (> 25 points). Various psychosocial outcome measures were collected using validated questionnaires to identify factors that may be associated with decision regret.

RESULTS

Out of 320 eligible patients, 212 participated, with 207 completing the DRS. Median age at start of radiotherapy was 64 years [interquartile range (IQR), 56-72], genders were balanced (105 female, 102 male), and the most common cancer types were breast (n = 84; 41%), prostate (n = 57; 28%), and head-and-neck cancer (n = 19; 9%). Radiotherapy was applied with curative intention in 188 patients (91%). Median time between last radiotherapy fraction and questionnaire completion was 23 months (IQR, 1-38). DRS comprehensibility was rated as good or very good by 98% (196 of 201) of patients. Decision regret was reported by 43% (n = 90) as absent, 38% (n = 78) as mild, and 18% (n = 38) as strong. In the multiple regression analysis, poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, low social support, and dissatisfaction with care were independent risk factors for higher decision regret after radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The German version of the DRS could be used to assess decision regret in a diverse cohort of cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy. Decision regret was prevalent in a considerable proportion of patients. Further studies are necessary to validate these findings and obtain causal factors associated with decision regret after radiotherapy.