Use of Decision Aids with Minority Patients: a Systematic Review

An Inclusive Analysis of Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Orthopedic Surgery Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing attention, disparities in outcomes for Black and Hispanic patients undergoing orthopedic surgery are widening. In other racial-ethnic minority groups, outcomes often go unreported. We sought to quantify disparities in surgical outcomes among Asian, American Indian or Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander patients across multiple orthopedic subspecialties.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried to identify all surgical procedures performed by an orthopedic surgeon from 2014 to 2020. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to investigate the impact of race and ethnicity on 30-day medical complications, readmission, reoperation, and mortality, while adjusting for orthopedic subspecialty and patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Across 1,512,480 orthopedic procedures, all patients who were not White were less likely to have arthroplasty-related procedures (P<.001), and Hispanic, Asian, and American Indian or Alaskan Native patients were more likely to have trauma-related procedures (P<.001). American Indian or Alaskan Native (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.005; 95% CI, 1.001-1.009; P=.011) and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (AOR, 1.009; 95% CI, 1.005-1.014; P<.001) patients had higher odds of major medical complications compared with White patients. American Indian or Alaskan Native patients had higher risk of reoperation (AOR, 1.005; 95% CI, 1.002-1.008; P=.002) and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander patients had higher odds of mortality (AOR, 1.003; 95% CI, 1.000-1.005; P=.019) compared with White patients.

CONCLUSION

Disparities regarding surgical outcome and utilization rates persist across orthopedic surgery. American Indian or Alaskan Native and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander patients, who are under-represented in research, have lower rates of arthroplasty but higher odds of medical complication, reoperation, and mortality. This study highlights the importance of including these patients in orthopedic research to affect policy-related discussions. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(3):e131-e138.].

Factors Influencing Shared Decision-Making Between Healthcare Providers and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer People of Color About Intimate Partner Violence

Within the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community, people of color (POC) disproportionately experience intimate partner violence (IPV). While shared decision-making (SDM)-a model of patient-provider communication-about IPV could benefit LGBTQ POC, its unique challenges merit consideration. This study identifies key factors affecting SDM between LGBTQ POC and healthcare providers surrounding IPV. LGBTQ POC participants (n = 217) in Chicago and San Francisco completed surveys about demographic information, healthcare utilization, and IPV history. Individual interviews and focus groups were then conducted with a Chicago-based subset of participants (n = 46) who identified as LGBTQ IPV survivors of color. Descriptive analyses were conducted of survey responses while focus group and interview transcripts were analyzed and thematically coded. Although 71% of survey participants experienced IPV, only 35% were asked about IPV in healthcare interactions within the previous year. Focus group and interview participants endorsed encounter-, patient-, and provider-centered factors affecting SDM around IPV. When IPV was discussed, patient-provider trust was essential while concordance of identities could either encourage or discourage IPV disclosure. Patients were hesitant to disclose IPV if they had never discussed their LGBTQ identity with their provider or thought providers would ignore their preferences for addressing IPV. Deterrents to SDM included providers denying the prevalence of IPV among LGBTQ individuals or lacking resources to support LGBTQ IPV survivors of color. This study highlights the identity-driven barriers that LGBTQ POC face in discussing IPV with providers. Utilizing SDM to discuss IPV with LGBTQ POC can better address the diverse health needs of this community. However, its success requires that providers acknowledge the diversity of experiences among this population, promote LGBTQ-inclusive practices, and identify resources welcome to LGBTQ POC.

Decision aids for promoting shared decision-making: A review of systematic reviews

In the context of shared decision-making (SDM), experts have advocated the use of validated decision aids (DAs) as valuable tools for facilitating SDM in various healthcare scenarios. This comprehensive review attempts to analyze a vast corpus of DA research by performing thorough searches across four prominent databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science). Independent reviewers selected relevant reviews, extracted data, and assessed review quality using the AMSTAR II tool. A total of 34 systematic reviews were identified and evaluated in this review, encompassing a wide range of outcomes associated with using DAs. These outcomes include patient knowledge, patient involvement in SDM, decision conflict, decision regret, satisfaction, and adherence. In addition, DAs positively affect healthcare provider outcomes by increasing satisfaction, reducing decision conflicts, and lengthening clinical consultations. This review highlights the need for additional research in specific contexts such as long-term care, mental health, and reproductive health to better understand the benefits and challenges of implementing DAs in these settings. Such research can contribute to the improvement of SDM practices and patient-centered care.

Clinician use of the Statin Choice Shared Decision-making Encounter Tool in a Major Health System

BACKGROUND

Effective shared decision-making (SDM) tools for use during clinical encounters are available, but, outside of study settings, little is known about clinician use of these tools in practice.

OBJECTIVE

To describe real-world use of an SDM encounter tool for statin prescribing, Statin Choice, embedded into the workflow of an electronic health record.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

PARTICIPANTS

Clinicians and their statin-eligible patients who had outpatient encounters between January 2020 and June 2021 in Cleveland Clinic Health System.

MAIN MEASURES

Clinician use of Statin Choice was recorded within the Epic record system. We categorized each patient's 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk into low (< 5%), borderline (5-7.5%), intermediate (7.5-20%), and high (≥ 20%). Other patient factors included age, sex, insurance, and race. We used mixed effects logistic regression to assess the odds of using Statin Choice for statin-eligible patients, accounting for clustering by clinician and site. We generated a residual intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to characterize the impact of the clinician on Statin Choice use.

KEY RESULTS

Statin Choice was used in 7% of 68,505 eligible patients. Of 1047 clinicians, 48% used Statin Choice with ≥ 1 patient, and these clinicians used it with a median 9% of their patients (interquartile range: 3-22%). In the mixed effects logistic regression model, patient age (adjusted OR per year: 1.04; 95%CI 1.03-1.04) and 10-year ASVCD risk (aOR for 5-7.5% versus < 5% risk: 1.28; 95%CI: 1.14-1.44) were associated with use of Statin Choice. Black versus White race was associated with a lower odds of Statin Choice use (aOR: 0.83; 95%CI: 0.73-0.95), as was female versus male sex (aOR: 0.83; 95%CI: 0.76-0.90). The model ICC demonstrated that 53% of the variation in use of Statin Choice was clinician-driven.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient factors, including race and sex, were associated with clinician use of Statin Choice; half the variation in use was attributable to individual clinicians.

A Scoping Review of Personalized, Interactive, Web-Based Clinical Decision Tools Available for Breast Cancer Prevention and Screening in the United States

Introduction. Personalized web-based clinical decision tools for breast cancer prevention and screening could address knowledge gaps, enhance patient autonomy in shared decision-making, and promote equitable care. The purpose of this review was to present evidence on the availability, usability, feasibility, acceptability, quality, and uptake of breast cancer prevention and screening tools to support their integration into clinical care. Methods. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist to conduct this review. We searched 6 databases to identify literature on the development, validation, usability, feasibility, acceptability testing, and uptake of the tools into practice settings. Quality assessment for each tool was conducted using the International Patient Decision Aid Standard instrument, with quality scores ranging from 0 to 63 (lowest-highest). Results. We identified 10 tools for breast cancer prevention and 9 tools for screening. The tools included individual (e.g., age), clinical (e.g., genomic risk factors), and health behavior (e.g., alcohol use) characteristics. Fourteen tools included race/ethnicity, but no tool incorporated contextual factors (e.g., insurance, access) associated with breast cancer. All tools were internally or externally validated. Six tools had undergone usability testing in samples including White (median, 71%; range, 9%-96%), insured (99%; 97%-100%) women, with college education or higher (60%; 27%-100%). All of the tools were developed and tested in academic settings. Seven (37%) tools showed potential evidence of uptake in clinical practice. The tools had an average quality assessment score of 21 (range, 9-39). Conclusions. There is limited evidence on testing and uptake of breast cancer prevention and screening tools in diverse clinical settings. The development, testing, and integration of tools in academic and nonacademic settings could potentially improve uptake and equitable access to these tools.

Highlights

There were 19 personalized, interactive, Web-based decision tools for breast cancer prevention and screening.Breast cancer outcomes were personalized based on individual clinical characteristics (e.g., age, medical history), genomic risk factors (e.g., BRCA1/2), race and ethnicity, and health behaviors (e.g., smoking). The tools did not include contextual factors (e.g., insurance status, access to screening facilities) that could potentially contribute to breast cancer outcomes.Validation, usability, acceptability, and feasibility testing were conducted mostly among White and/or insured patients with some college education (or higher) in academic settings. There was limited evidence on testing and uptake of the tools in nonacademic clinical settings.

Provider communication contributes to colorectal cancer screening intention through improving screening outcome expectancies and perceived behavioral control

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening continues to be underutilized in the US despite the availability of multiple effective, guideline-recommended screening options. Provider recommendation has been consistently shown to improve screening completion. Yet, available literature provides little information as to how specific information providers communicate influence patient decision-making about CRC screening. We tested the pathways through which information communicated by providers about the "Why" and "How" of CRC screening using the mt-sDNA test contributes to intention to complete the test. Data came from a behavioral theory-informed survey that we developed to identify psychosocial factors associated with mt-sDNA screening. RTI International administered the survey between 03/2022-06/2022 to a sample of US adults ages 45-75 who received a valid order for mt-sDNA screening with a shipping date between 5/2021-9/2021. Participants completed an electronic or paper survey. We tested the proposed relationships using structural equation modeling and tested indirect effects using Monte Carlo method. A total of 2,973 participants completed the survey (response rate: 21.7%) and 81.6% (n = 2,427) reported have had a conversation with their health care provider about mt-sDNA screening before the test was ordered. We found that "Why" information from providers was positively associated with perceived effectiveness of mt-sDNA screening, while "How" information was positively associated with perceived ease of use. "Why" information contributed to screening intention through perceived effectiveness while "How" information contributed to screening intention through perceived ease of use. These findings emphasize the critical role of provider communication in shaping patient decision-making regarding CRC screening. CRC screening interventions could consider implementing provider-patient communication strategies focusing on improving patient understanding of the rationale for CRC screening and the effectiveness of available screening options as well as addressing barriers and enhancing patients' self-efficacy in completing their preferred screening option.

Patient Preferences for Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction

Importance

Up to 40% of women experience dissatisfaction after breast reconstruction due to unexpected outcomes that are poorly aligned with personal preferences. Identifying what attributes patients value when considering surgery could improve shared decision-making. Adaptive choice-based conjoint (ACBC) analysis can elicit individual-level treatment preferences.

Objectives

To identify which attributes of breast reconstruction are most important to women considering surgery and to describe how these attributes differ by those who prefer flap vs implant reconstruction.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This web-based, cross-sectional study was conducted from March 1, 2022, to January 31, 2023, at Duke University and between June 1 and December 31, 2022, through the Love Research Army with ACBC analysis. Participants were 105 women at Duke University with a new diagnosis of or genetic predisposition to breast cancer who were considering mastectomy with reconstruction and 301 women with a history of breast cancer or a genetic predisposition as identified through the Love Research Army registry.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Relative importance scores, part-worth utility values, and maximum acceptable risks were estimated.

Results

Overall, 406 women (105 from Duke University [mean (SD) age, 46.3 (10.5) years] and 301 from the Love Research Army registry [mean (SD) age, 59.2 (11.9) years]) participated. The attribute considered most important was the risk of abdominal morbidity (mean [SD] relative importance [RI], 28% [11%]), followed by chance of major complications (RI, 25% [10%]), number of additional operations (RI, 23% [12%]), appearance of the breasts (RI, 13% [12%]), and recovery time (RI, 11% [7%]). Most participants (344 [85%]) preferred implant-based reconstruction; these participants cared most about abdominal morbidity (mean [SD] RI, 30% [11%]), followed by the risk of complications (mean [SD], RI, 26% [11%]) and additional operations (mean [SD] RI, 21% [12%]). In contrast, participants who preferred flap reconstruction cared most about additional operations (mean [SD] RI, 31% [15%]), appearance of the breasts (mean [SD] RI, 27% [16%]), and risk of complications (mean [SD] RI, 18% [6%]). Factors independently associated with choosing flap reconstruction included being married (odds ratio [OR], 2.30 [95% CI, 1.04-5.08]; P = .04) and higher educational level (college education; OR, 2.43 [95% CI, 1.01-5.86]; P = .048), while having an income level of greater than $75 000 was associated with a decreased likelihood of choosing the flap profile (OR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.21-0.97]; P = .01). Respondents who preferred flap appearance were willing to accept a mean (SD) increase of 14.9% (2.2%) chance of abdominal morbidity (n = 113) or 6.4% (4.8%) chance of complications (n = 115).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study provides information on how women value different aspects of their care when making decisions for breast reconstruction. Future studies should assess how decision aids that elicit individual-level preferences can help tailor patient-physician discussions to focus preoperative counseling on factors that matter most to each patient and ultimately improve patient-centered care.

Use of a Linguistically Appropriate Decision Aid for Cervical Cancer Screening of South Asian Ethnic Minority Women in Hong Kong: A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Decision aids have been shown to be effective in assisting the decision-making process in healthcare settings. This study aimed to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a linguistically appropriate printed decision aid for cervical cancer screening in South Asian women and to preliminarily estimate its effects on decisional conflicts, clarity of values, risk perception, the screening decision and screening uptake.

METHODS

This was a pilot randomised controlled trial. Forty-eight South Asian women aged 25 to 64 years were recruited and allocated to either the intervention group or control group. The participants in the intervention group read a linguistically appropriate printed decision aid.

RESULTS

All of the participants in the intervention group agreed that the decision aid was useful in aiding their decision-making. These participants showed significantly greater improvement in decisional conflicts, clarity of values and risk perceptions than those in the control group (all p < 0.05). The screening uptake rate was significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The decision aid was feasible and acceptable among South Asian women, and it resulted in reduced decisional conflict and increased screening uptake compared with usual care. To improve the convenience of using decision aids, they could be developed in various forms, such as printed and mobile application forms, to meet individual requirements.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on 23 October 2021 (ChiCTR2100052225).

Decision Regret in Patients with Localised Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Treatment choice for localised prostate cancer remains a significant challenge for patients and clinicians, with uncertainty over decisions potentially leading to conflict and regret. There is a need to further understand the prevalence and prognostic factors of decision regret to improve patient quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

To generate the best estimates for the prevalence of significant decision regret localised prostate cancer patients, and to investigate prognostic patient, oncological, and treatment factors associated with regret.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and PsychINFO databases including studies evaluating the prevalence or patient, treatment, or oncological prognostic factors in localised prostate cancer patients. A pooled prevalence of significant regret was calculated with the formal prognostic factor evaluation conducted per factor identified.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Significant decision regret was present in a pooled 20% (95% confidence interval 16-23) of patients across 14 studies and 17883 patients. This was lower in active surveillance (13%), with little difference between those who underwent radiotherapy (19%) and those who underwent prostatectomy (18%). Evaluation of individual prognostic factors demonstrated higher regret in those with poorer post-treatment bowel, sexual, and urinary function; decreased involvement in the decision-making process; and Black ethnicity. However, evidence remains conflicting, with low or moderate certainty of findings.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant proportion of men experience decision regret after a localised prostate cancer diagnosis. Monitoring those with increased functional symptoms and improving patient involvement in the decision-making process through education and decision aids may reduce regret.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We looked at how common regret in treatment decisions is after treatment for early-stage prostate cancer and factors linked with this. We found that one in five regret their decision, with those who had experienced side effects or were less involved in the decision-making process more likely to have regret. By addressing these, clinicians could reduce regret and improve quality of life.

Shared Decision-Making and Cardiovascular Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Shared decision-making is increasingly embraced in health care and recommended in cardiovascular guidelines. Patient involvement in health care decisions, patient-clinician communication, and models of patient-centered care are critical to improve health outcomes and to promote equity, but formal models and evaluation in cardiovascular care are nascent. Shared decision-making promotes equity by involving clinicians and patients, sharing the best available evidence, and recognizing the needs, values, and experiences of individuals and their families when faced with the task of making decisions. Broad endorsement of shared decision-making as a critical component of high-quality, value-based care has raised our awareness, although uptake in clinical practice remains suboptimal for a range of patient, clinician, and system issues. Strategies effective in promoting shared decision-making include educating clinicians on communication techniques, engaging multidisciplinary medical teams, incorporating trained decision coaches, and using tools (ie, patient decision aids) at appropriate literacy and numeracy levels to support patients in their cardiovascular decisions. This scientific statement shines a light on the limited but growing body of evidence of the impact of shared decision-making on cardiovascular outcomes and the potential of shared decision-making as a driver of health equity so that everyone has just opportunities. Multilevel solutions must align to address challenges in policies and reimbursement, system-level leadership and infrastructure, clinician training, access to decision aids, and patient engagement to fully support patients and clinicians to engage in the shared decision-making process and to drive equity and improvement in cardiovascular outcomes.

A Systematic Review of Decision Aids in Hematologic Malignancies: What Are Currently Available and What Are We Missing?

BACKGROUND

Patient decision aids (PDAs) are tools designed to facilitate decision-making. In this systematic review, we summarized existing studies on the development and evaluation of PDAs for patients with hematologic malignancies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched for articles in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We included studies, abstracts, and clinical trial protocols available in English involving PDAs for patients age ≥18 diagnosed with a hematologic malignancy and/or their caregivers. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Of the 5281 titles/abstracts screened, 15 were included: 1 protocol, 7 abstracts, and 7 full-texts. Six were PDA developmental studies, 6 were pilot studies, and 3 were randomized trials. PDA formats included electronic with web content, videos, and/or audio, questionnaires, bedside instruments, and a combination of various formats. Average participant age ranged from 36.0 to 62.4 years. Patients and caregivers identified efficacy, adverse effects, cost, and quality of life as important decision-making factors. PDAs were associated with increased knowledge and patient satisfaction as well as decreased decisional conflict and attitudinal barriers. Research on PDAs for adult patients with hematologic malignancies and their caregivers is limited. Among the studies, PDAs appear to support patients in shared decision-making.

CONCLUSION

While current literature examining the use of PDAs for adults with hematologic malignancies is limited, the positive impact of PDAs on shared decision-making and patient outcomes warrants additional research in this field.

Development of a personalized shared decision-making tool for knee osteoarthritis and user-testing with African American and Latina women

Background

Patients with chronic knee pain are often unaware of treatment options and likely outcomes-information that is critical to decision-making. A consistent framework for communicating patient-personalized information enables clinicians to provide consistent, targeted, and relevant information. Our objective was to user-test a shared decision-making (SDM) tool for chronic knee pain.

Methods

A cross-functional team developed a Markov-based health economics model and tested the model outputs with patient panels, patient and clinician focus groups, and clinical specialists. The resulting SDM tool was user-tested in a parallel-designed, randomized controlled study with 52 African American and 52 Latina women from geographically representative areas of the US. Participants were randomized to counseling with or without the SDM tool. Feedback was collected at intervention and at 1 month after intervention and analyzed with Student's t-tests and Chi-squared analyses (alpha = 0.05).

Results

Qualitative results indicated patients understood the material, rated the overall experience highly, and were likely to recommend the physician. The SDM group reported high satisfaction with the tool. A greater proportion of the SDM group (56%) reported increased physical activity over baseline at 1 month compared with the control group (33%) (P = 0.0005). New use of medications for knee pain (58% SDM; 49% control) did not differ significantly between groups (P = 0.15).

Conclusion

Use of this innovative SDM tool was associated with high satisfaction and a significant increase in self-reported physical activity level at 1 month. The SDM tool may elicit behavioral changes to promote musculoskeletal health.

Decision-making support among racial and ethnic minorities diagnosed with breast or prostate cancer: A systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

To describe the types of decision-making support interventions offered to racial and ethnic minority adults diagnosed with breast or prostate cancer and to draw any associations between these interventions and patient-reported quality of life (QoL) outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted literature searches in five bibliographic databases. Studies were screened through independent review and assessed for quality. Results were analyzed using inductive qualitative methods to determine thematic commonalities and synthesized in narrative form.

RESULTS

Searches across five databases yielded 2496 records, which were screened by title/abstract and full-text to identify 10 studies meeting inclusion criteria. The use of decision aids (DAs), trained personnel, delivery models and frameworks, and educational materials were notable decision-making support interventions. Analysis revealed six thematic areas: 1) Personalized reports; 2) Effective communication; 3) Involvement in decision-making; 4) Health literacy; 5) Social support; and 6) Feasibility in clinical setting.

CONCLUSION

Evidence suggests decision-making support interventions are associated with positive outcomes of racial and ethnic minorities with patient-reported factors like improved patient engagement, less decisional regret, higher satisfaction, improved communication, awareness of health literacy and cultural competence.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Future decision-making interventions for racial and ethnic minority cancer patients should focus on social determinants of health, social support systems, and clinical outcomes like QoL and survival.

Factors associated with mammography screening among Reunionese women : a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To explore the factors associated with the uptake of mammography screening in Reunionese women aged 50-65 years.

METHODS

This study included all women aged 50 to 65 years participating in a population-based cross-sectional study "FOSFORE". Participants were recruited between March and June 2017 using two sampling frames. The first frame consisted of households with a landline telephone, with or without a mobile line, by first randomly generating a telephone number and then randomly selecting an individual from among all eligible women in the household. The second sampling frame was constituted of women with an exclusive mobile line, who were selected directly if they met the eligibility criteria. Data were weighted for age and socio-professional status to ensure representativeness at the Reunion Island level. Weighted logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios while adjusting for confounders.

RESULTS

417 women were included in the study; 63.8% were up to date with guidelines on mammography screening and 36.2% were not up to date. Four factors were significantly associated with mammography screening, with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.92 (95% CI 1.51-5.61) for not having an Active Solidarity Income, 1.98 (95% CI 1.22-3.23) for having a regular gynecological follow-up by a physician, 6.53 (95% CI 3.23-13.21) for performing a Pap smear test in the past two years, and 2.07 (95% CI 1.21-3.52) for having an adequate literacy level (HLQ3).

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study suggest that higher socio-economic status is an indicator of participation in mammography screening in La Réunion, and future educational and intervention programs should target women in deprived areas.

Patient engagement strategies for adults with chronic conditions: an evidence map

BACKGROUND

Patient and family engagement (PFE) has been defined as a partnership between patients, families, and health care providers to achieve positive health care outcomes. There is evidence that PFE is critical to improving outcomes. We sought to systematically identify and map the evidence on PFE strategies for adults with chronic conditions and identify areas needing more research.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Cochrane, January 2015 to September 2021 for systematic reviews on strategies for engaging patients with chronic conditions and their caregivers. From each review, we abstracted search dates, number and type of studies, populations, interventions, and outcomes. PFE strategies were categorized into direct patient care, health system, and community-policy level strategies. We found few systematic reviews on strategies at the health system, and none at the community-policy level. In view of this, we also searched for original studies that focused on PFE strategies at those two levels and reviewed the PFE strategies used and study findings.

RESULTS

We found 131 reviews of direct patient care strategies, 5 reviews of health system strategies, and no reviews of community-policy strategies. Four original studies addressed PFE at the health system or community-policy levels. Most direct patient care reviews focused on self-management support (SMS) (n = 85) and shared decision-making (SDM) (n = 43). Forty-nine reviews reported positive effects, 35 reported potential benefits, 37 reported unclear benefits, and 4 reported no benefits. Health system level strategies mainly involved patients and caregivers serving on advisory councils. PFE strategies with the strongest evidence focused on SMS particularly for patients with diabetes. Many SDM reviews reported potential benefits especially for patients with cancer.

DISCUSSION

Much more evidence exists on the effects of direct patient care strategies on PFE than on the effects of health system or community-policy strategies. Most reviews indicated that direct patient care strategies had positive effects or potential benefits. A limitation of this evidence map is that due to its focus on reviews, which were plentiful, it did not capture details of individual interventions. Nevertheless, this evidence map should help to focus attention on gaps that require more research in efforts to improve PFE.

Decision support needs for shared clinical decision-making regarding HPV vaccination among adults 27-45 years of age

OBJECTIVE

Identify HPV information needs and shared clinical decision-making preferences among adults 27-45 and describe differences in needs and preferences among underserved and vulnerable populations.

METHODS

Participants 27-45 years old with no history of HPV vaccination completed a cross-sectional web-based survey between April-May 2020 (N = 702). Preferred role in shared clinical decision making was described across demographic groups and sociodemographic correlates of HPV vaccine information needs.

RESULTS

Most (77.6%) reported a preference to make a medical decision on their own or after consulting with a healthcare provider, while the remaining respondents preferred to make a joint decision (17.0%) or for their doctor to make the decision (5.4%). Over 80% needed more information about safety, effectiveness, personal benefit, provider recommendation, side effects, and risks. Education was the strongest demographic factors associated with higher information needs (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The majority of individuals across demographic groups were individually focused with regard to their healthcare decisions and wanted more information about HPV vaccine safety, side effects, and risks, in addition to personalized information about benefits from HPV vaccination.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Patient-centered interventions are needed to engage adults in shared decision-making regarding HPV vaccination.

Are patients really getting what they want? The routine implementation of decision aids for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis in the high value healthcare collaborative and alignment between patient treatment choice and receipt

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Alignment between patients' treatment choices and treatments received is acknowledged as an important outcome of shared decision-making (SDM), yet recent research suggests that patients' choices do not always align with their actual treatment trajectories. This paper explores the alignment of patient-expressed treatment choices (for surgery or medical management) after exposure to decision aids and treatments received among patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis within High Value Healthcare Collaborative (HVHC) systems as the collaborative integrated decision aids intended to support SDM into routine clinical practice.

METHOD

This retrospective cohort study examines data from adult (≥18 years) patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis who received decision aids as part of orthopaedic consultations within HVHC systems between 2012 and 2015. Multivariable logistic regression explored the association between patient-level characteristics with the odds of treatment choice-receipt alignment.

RESULTS

The majority of patients with knee osteoarthritis (68.3%) and hip osteoarthritis (71.9%) received treatments aligned with their choices following exposure to decision aids, but analyses reveal important differences in the odds of such alignment across patient characteristics. In adjusted models, African American patients with knee osteoarthritis had 50% lower odds of receiving treatment aligned with their choices compared with Caucasian patients (OR = 0.52, P < .05). Medicare- or Medicaid-insured knee patients had 49% and 59% lower odds (respectively) of receiving choice-aligned treatments relative to privately insured patients. Patients with knee (OR = 0.40, P < .01) or hip (OR = 0.75, P < .05) osteoarthritis at earlier decision-making stages had lower odds of receiving treatments congruent with their choices.

CONCLUSION

This work elucidates the odds of treatment choice-aligned care for patients within health care systems attempting to routinely integrate decision aids to support SDM into clinical practice and underscores the gaps in achieving this alignment among African American patients, those with public insurance and those at early decision-making stages.

A Systematic Review of Shared Decision-Making Interventions for Service Users With Serious Mental Illnesses: State of the Science and Future Directions

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision making (SDM) is a health communication model that may be particularly appealing to service users with serious mental illnesses, who often want to be involved in making decisions about their mental health care. The purpose of this systematic review was to describe and evaluate participant, intervention, methodological, and outcome characteristics of SDM intervention studies conducted within this population.

METHODS

Systematic searches of the literature through April 2020 were conducted and supplemented by hand searching of reference lists of identified studies. A total of 53 independent studies of SDM interventions that were conducted with service users with serious mental illnesses and that included a quantitative or qualitative measure of the intervention were included in the review. Data were independently extracted by at least two authors.

RESULTS

Most studies were conducted with middle-age, male, White individuals from Western countries. Interventions fell into the following categories: decision support tools only, multicomponent interventions involving decision support tools, multicomponent interventions not involving decision support tools, and shared care planning and preference elicitation interventions. Most studies were randomized controlled trials with sufficient sample sizes. Outcomes assessed were diverse, spanning decision-making constructs, clinical and functional, treatment engagement or adherence, and other constructs.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest important future directions for research, including the need to evaluate the impact of SDM in special populations (e.g., young adults and racial-ethnic minority groups); to expand interventions to a broader array of decisions, users, and contexts; and to establish consensus measures to assess intervention effectiveness.

Impact of Pre-visit Contextual Data Collection on Patient-Physician Communication and Patient Activation: a Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Patient contextual data (PCD) are often missing from electronic health records, limiting the opportunity to incorporate preferences and life circumstances into care. Engaging patients through tools that collect and summarize such data may improve communication and patient activation. However, differential tool adoption by race might widen health care disparities.

OBJECTIVE

Determine if a digital tool designed to collect and present PCD improves communication and patient activation; secondarily, evaluate if use impacts outcomes by race.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A pragmatic, two-armed, non-blinded, randomized controlled trial conducted during 2019 in a primary care setting.

INTERVENTION

The PCD tool (PatientWisdom) invited patients to identify preferences, values, goals, and barriers to care. Patients were randomized to a standard pre-visit email or facilitated enrollment with dedicated outreach to encourage use of the tool.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Outcomes of interest were post-visit patient communication and patient activation measured by the Communication Assessment Tool (CAT) and Patient Activation Measure (PAM), respectively. Outcomes were evaluated using treatment-on-the-treated (TOT) and intention-to-treat (ITT) principles.

KEY RESULTS

A total of 301 patients were enrolled. Facilitated enrollment resulted in a five-fold increase in uptake of the PCD tool. TOT analysis indicated that the PCD tool was associated with notable increases in specific CAT items rated as excellent: "treated me with respect" (+ 13 percentage points; p = 0.04), "showed interest in my ideas" (+ 14 percentage points; p = 0.03), "showed care and concern" (+ 16 percentage points; p = 0.02), and "spent about the right amount of time with me" (+ 11 percentage points; p = 0.05). There were no significant pre/post-visit differences in PAM scores between arms (- 4.41 percentage points; p = 0.58). ITT results were similar. We saw no evidence of the treatment effect varying by race in ITT or TOT analyses.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The inclusion of PCD enhanced essential aspects of patient-provider communication but did not affect patient activation. Outcomes did not differ by race.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clincaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03766841.

Organizational context and the learning and change readiness climate for implementing an evidence-based shared decision-making aid in US rheumatology clinics

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the organizational context that may support learning and change readiness climates that previous research has found to be conducive to implementing evidence-based interventions.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

An exploratory, mixed method evaluation that included 15 rheumatology clinics throughout the United States was performed. Quantitative data were collected using a web-based survey completed by 135 clinic members. Qualitative data were collected via semi-structured interviews with 88 clinic members.

FINDINGS

In general, clinics reported strong, positive learning and change readiness climates. More complex organizations (e.g. multispecialty, academic medical centers) with rational/hierarchical cultures and members with longer tenure were associated with less supportive learning and change readiness climates. The authors' findings highlight opportunities for organizational leaders and evidence-based intervention sponsors to focus their attention and allocate resources to settings that may be most susceptible to implementation challenges.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

First, the authors address a deficit in previous research by describing both the level and strength of the learning and change readiness climates for implementing an evidence-based shared decision-making aid (SDMA) and examine how these vary as a function of the organizational context. Second, the study examines a broader set of factors to assess the organizational context (e.g. organizational culture, organizational structure, ownership) than previous research, which may be especially salient for shaping the climate in smaller specialty clinics like those we study. Third, the authors utilize a mixed methods analysis to provide greater insights into questions of how and why organizational factors such as size and structure may influence the learning and change readiness climate.

Lean Into the Uncomfortable: Using Trauma-Informed Care to Engage in Shared Decision-Making With Racial Minorities With Hematologic Malignancies

Discussions involving racial health disparities must include pathways for engaging in shared decision-making with racial/ethnic minorities. Research demonstrates glaring racial and ethnic disparities when it comes to hematologic malignancies from the time of diagnosis to treatment and even at the end of life. Unfortunately, decision-making in these circumstances may be streamlined, given the urgency of the disease, prognostic uncertainty, and varying treatment options. Being diagnosed with cancer is undoubtedly a traumatic experience and a patient's race and/or ethnicity add an important dimension to their experience. The tenets of trauma-informed care (TIC) are anchored in recognizing that trauma can manifest in several ways and acknowledging the impact of past trauma on a patient's present and future behaviors. We argue that using a TIC approach may help hematologists create a space for decision-making while minimizing the risk of re-traumatization and perpetuating racial disparities. Using the foundation of TIC, an interprofessional team can begin addressing manifestations of trauma and hopefully mitigate racial and ethnic disparities.

Racial Disparities in Bariatric Surgery Complications and Mortality Using the MBSAQIP Data Registry

Background

Racial disparities in postoperative complications have been demonstrated in bariatric surgery, yet the relationship of race to complication severity is unknown.

Study Design

Adult laparoscopic primary bariatric procedures were queried from the 2015 and 2016 MBSAQIP registry. Adjusted logistic and multinomial regressions were used to examine the relationships between race and 30-day complications categorized by the Clavien-Dindo grading system.

Results

A total of 212,970 patients were included in the regression analyses. For Black patients, readmissions were higher (OR = 1.39, p < 0.0001) and the odds of a Grade 1, 3, 4, or 5 complication were increased compared with White patients (OR = 1.21, p < 0.0001; OR = 1.21, p < 0.0001; OR = 1.22, p = 0.01; and OR = 1.43, p = 0.04) respectively. The odds of a Grade 3 complication for Hispanic patients were higher compared with White patients (OR = 1.59, p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Black patients have higher odds of readmission and multiple grades of complications (including death) compared with White patients. Hispanic patients have higher odds of a Grade 3 complication compared with White patients. No significant differences were found with other races. Specific causes of these disparities are beyond the limitations of the dataset and stand as a topic for future inquiry.

Improving knowledge and decision readiness to participate in cancer clinical trials: Effects of a plain language decision aid for minority cancer survivors

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of a web-based, plain language decision aid (CHOICES DA) on minority cancer survivors' knowledge of cancer clinical trials (CCTs), readiness for making decisions about clinical trial participation, and willingness to participate in a clinical trial.

METHODS

Participants were 64 Black and Hispanic cancer survivors from Miami, Florida. In a single arm intervention study, participants completed self-report assessments of CCT knowledge, decision readiness regarding clinical trial participation, and willingness to participate at three time points.

RESULTS

Black and Hispanic participants did not differ on demographic characteristics. Post-test and follow-up measures of CCT knowledge and decision readiness were significantly greater than pre-test measures for the sample overall, and for Black and Hispanic participants separately. Few significant differences were observed between Black and Hispanic participant outcomes at each survey time point, and willingness to participate did not change overall and for either group independently.

CONCLUSIONS

Reviewing the CHOICES DA was associated with significantly improved knowledge and decision readiness to participate in a CCT immediately and at 2-week follow-up.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

These findings suggest that CHOICES DA may support informed decision making about CCT participation within an acute, yet clinically relevant window of time for minority cancer patients who are substantially under-represented in cancer research.

An overview of reviews on strategies to reduce health inequalities

BACKGROUND

Governments are incentivized to develop and implement health action programs focused on equity to ensure progress with effective strategies or interventions.

OBJECTIVE

Identify and synthesize strategies or interventions that facilitate the reduction of health inequalities.

METHODS

A systematic search strategy was carried out up until August 2019 in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Elsevier), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, LILACS, Scopus, Scielo and Epistemonikos. In addition, a snowball strategy was used. Literature reviews (LRs) of experimental and quasi-experimental studies were included. The identified interventions and outcomes were categorized based on the recommendation by the Cochrane group in "Effective Practice and Organization of Care". The quality of the included LRs was evaluated using the AMSTAR 2 tool.

RESULTS

Four thousand ninety-five articles were identified, of which 97 were included in the synthesis of evidence. Most of the studies included focused on the general population, vulnerable populations and minority populations. The subjects of general health and healthy lifestyles were the most commonly addressed. According to the classification of the type of intervention, the domain covered most was the delivery arrangements, followed by the domain of implementation strategies. The most frequent group of outcomes was the reported outcome in (clinical) patients, followed by social outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The strategies that facilitate the reduction of health inequalities must be intersectoral and multidisciplinary in nature, including all sectors of the health system. It is essential to continue generating interventions focused on strengthening health systems in order to achieve adequate universal health coverage, with a process of comprehensive and quality care.

The Impact of Previsit Contextual Data Collection on Patient-Provider Communication and Patient Activation: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Patient-centered care is respectful of and responsive to individual patient preferences, needs, and values. To provide patient-centered care, clinicians need to know and incorporate patients' context into their communication and care with patients. Patient contextual data (PCD) encompass social determinants of health and patients' needs, values, goals, and preferences relevant to their care. PCD can be challenging to collect as a routine component of the time-limited primary care visit.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine if patient-provider communication and patient activation are different for patient users and patient nonusers of an electronic health record (EHR)-integrated PCD tool and assess if the impact of using PCD on patient-provider communication and patient activation differs for Black and White patients.

METHODS

We describe a randomized controlled trial of a prospective cohort of non-Hispanic White and Black patients who receive primary care services at a midwestern academic health care system in the United States. We will evaluate whether providing PCD through a consumer informatics tool enhances patient-provider communication, as measured by the Communication Assessment Tool, and we will evaluate patient activation, as measured by the Patient Activation Measure for PCD tool users and nonusers. Furthermore, owing to racial disparities in care and communication, we seek to determine if the adoption and use of the tool might narrow the differences between patient groups.

RESULTS

The trial was funded in November 2017 and received local ethics review approval in February 2019. The study began recruitment in April 2019 and enrollment concluded in October 2019 with 301 participants. The analysis was completed in May 2020, and trial results are expected to be published in winter 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

Recently, there has been increased attention to the role of health information technology tools to enable patients to collaborate with providers through the sharing of PCD. The adoption of such tools may overcome the barriers of current EHRs by directly engaging patients to submit their contextual data. Effectively, these tools would support the EHR in providing a more holistic understanding of the patient. Research further supports that individuals who have robust digital engagement using consumer informatics tools have higher participation in treatment follow-up and self-care across populations. Therefore, it is critical to investigate interventions that elicit and share patients' social risks and care preferences with the health care team as a mechanism to improve individualized care and reduce the gap in health outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03766841; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03766841.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR1-10.2196/20309.

Cancer screening utilization by residence and sexual orientation

PURPOSE

Although few studies have examined screening uptake among sexual minorities (lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer), almost none have examined it in the specific context of rural populations. Therefore, our objective was to assess how cancer screening utilization varies by residence and sexual orientation.

METHODS

Publicly available population-level data from the 2014 and 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were utilized. Study outcomes included recommended recent receipt of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Independent variables of interest were residence (rural/urban) and sexual orientation (heterosexual/gay or lesbian/bisexual). Weighted proportions and multivariable logistic regressions were used to assess the association between the independent variables and the outcomes, adjusting for demographic, socioeconomic, and healthcare utilization factors.

RESULTS

Rates for all three cancer screenings were lowest in rural areas and among sexual minority populations (cervical: rural lesbians at 64.8% vs. urban heterosexual at 84.6%; breast: rural lesbians at 66.8% vs. urban heterosexual at 80.0%; colorectal for males: rural bisexuals at 52.4% vs. urban bisexuals at 81.3%; and colorectal for females: rural heterosexuals at 67.2% vs. rural lesbians at 74.4%). In the multivariate analyses for colorectal screening, compared to urban heterosexual males, both rural gay and rural heterosexual males were less likely to receive screening (aOR = 0.45; 95% = 0.24-0.73 and aOR = 0.79; 95% = 0.72-0.87, respectively) as were rural heterosexual females (aOR = 0.87; 95% = 0.80-0.94) compared to urban heterosexual females. For cervical screening, lesbians were less likely to receive screening (aOR = 0.62; 95% = 0.41-0.94) than heterosexuals, and there were no differences for breast screening.

CONCLUSION

We found that rural sexual minorities may experience disparities in cancer screening utilization associated with the compounding barriers of rural residence and sexual minority status, after adjusting for demographic, socioeconomic, and healthcare utilization factors. Further work is needed to identify factors influencing these disparities and how they might be addressed.

Teaching Intersectionality of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Race/Ethnicity in a Health Disparities Course

Introduction

Intersectionality considers how different identities simultaneously affect an individual's experiences. Those of multiple minority statuses may experience effects of intersecting systems of oppression. Most health disparities curricula do not focus on intersectionality. We studied the impact of an innovative module teaching intersectionality of sexual orientation, gender identity, and race/ethnicity issues in the required Pritzker School of Medicine course Health Care Disparities: Equity and Advocacy.

Methods

A short lecture reviewed sexual and gender minority (SGM) health disparities, intersectionality, minority stress, and shared decision making (SDM) to establish shared language among 83 first-year medical students. Students then viewed four videos of SGM patients of color (POC) describing their health care experiences, each followed by moderated discussion about how compounded minority stress affects lived experiences and health and how to improve SDM for SGM POC. One video interviewee attended the session and answered students' questions. Evaluation was performed using pre- and postsurveys.

Results

Feeling somewhat/completely confident in defining intersectionality increased from 57% to 96%. Prior to the session, 62% of respondents reported feeling somewhat/completely confident in identifying barriers to care for SGM patients, and 92% after. Thirty-three percent felt somewhat/completely confident in asking SGM patients about their identities before the session, and 81% after. Eighty-four percent rated the session as very good or excellent.

Discussion

The session was well received, improved student knowledge of intersectionality, and improved confidence in communicating with and caring for SGM patients. Future iterations could include condensing the lecture and including a patient panel and/or small-group discussion.

Racial differences in veterans' response to a standard vs. patient-centered decision aid for prostate cancer: Implications for decision making in African American and White men

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether racial differences exist in patient preferences for prostate cancer treatment after being informed about options using a patient-centered vs. a standard decision aid (DA).

METHODS

This article reports secondary analyses of a large study of men diagnosed with early stage prostate cancer. Men were recruited from 4 VA Health Systems and randomized to receive a patient-centered or standard DA about prostate cancer treatment options. Data were collected at 1) baseline, 2) after reading the DA but prior to diagnosis, and 3) after receiving a cancer diagnosis and meeting with a urologist.

RESULTS

White patients who received the patient-centered DA written at a 7th grade reading level were more likely to prefer active surveillance and less likely to prefer radiation compared to those who received the standard DA written at >9th grade reading level. African American patients' treatment preferences did not differ as a function of DA.

CONCLUSIONS

When informed about prostate cancer treatment options through a patient-centered DA, White patients changed their treatment preferences but African American patients did not.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

As DAs are increasingly being used in clinical practice, more research is needed regarding the efficacy, relevance, and receptivity of DAs for African Americans.

A contemporary analysis of racial disparities in recommended and received treatment for head and neck cancer

BACKGROUND

Racial disparities in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) negatively affect non-Hispanic black (NHB) patients. This study was aimed at understanding how treatment is prescribed and received across all HNSCC subsites.

METHODS

With the National Cancer Database, patients from 2004 to 2014 with surgically resectable HNSCCs, including tumors of the oral cavity (OC), oropharynx (OP), hypopharynx (HP), and larynx (LX), were studied. The treatment received was either upfront surgery or nonsurgical treatment. Treatment patterns were compared according to race and subsite, and how these differences changed over time was evaluated.

RESULTS

NHB patients were less likely than non-Hispanic white (NHW) patients to receive surgery across all subsites (relative risk [RR] for OC, 0.87; RR for OP, 0.75; RR for HP, 0.73; RR for LX, 0.87; all P values <.05). They were also more likely to refuse a recommended surgery (RR for OC, 1.50; RR for OP, 1.23; RR for HP, 1.23; RR for LX, 1.34), and this difference was significant except for HP. NHB patients were more likely to not be offered surgery across all subsites (RR for OC, 1.38; RR for OP, 1.07; RR for HP, 1.05; RR for LX, 1.03; all P values <.05). Rates of surgery increased and rates of not being offered surgery declined for both NHB and NHW patients from 2004 to 2014, but the absolute disparities persisted in 2014.

CONCLUSIONS

Across all HNSCC subsites, NHB patients were less likely than NHW patients to be recommended for and receive surgery and were more likely to refuse surgery. These differences have closed over time but persist. Enhanced shared decision making may improve these disparities.

Education Program Regarding Labor Epidurals Increases Utilization by Hispanic Medicaid Beneficiaries

Editor’s Perspective

What We Already Know about This Topic

What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Background

Hispanic women choose epidural labor analgesia less commonly than non-Hispanic women. This may represent a healthcare disparity related to a language barrier and inadequate opportunities for labor analgesia education. It was hypothesized that a language-concordant, educational program regarding labor epidurals would improve epidural utilization in two independent cohorts of Hispanic and non-Hispanic women.

Methods

A randomized controlled trial, blinded to anesthesia, nursing, and obstetric providers, was completed at an academic hospital (February 2015 to February 2017). Two cohorts of Medicaid beneficiaries of Hispanic (English- and/or Spanish-speaking) and non-Hispanic ethnicity were enrolled concurrently. The patients were randomized to routine care alone or routine care and an additional educational program comprised of three components: a video show, corresponding pamphlet, and in-person counseling. The primary endpoint was use of epidural labor analgesia. The secondary endpoint was change in response before and after delivery on common misconceptions based on a 12-point epidural questionnaire.

Results

Hispanic women randomized to the intervention group were 33% more likely to choose epidural analgesia compared to the routine care group (40 of 50 [80%] vs. 30 of 50 [60%]; risk ratio, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.02 to 1.74]; P = 0.029). For the non-Hispanic cohort, no difference was detected in epidural use between the intervention and routine care groups (41 of 50 [82%] vs. 42 of 49 [86%]; risk ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.80 to 1.14]; P = 0.62), but the study was underpowered to determine a result of no difference. Patients assigned to the intervention had a greater improvement in epidural understanding compared with routine care, among both Hispanic (2.26 vs. 0.74, respectively; difference in change from baseline, 1.52 [95% CI, 0.77 to 2.27]; P &lt; 0.001) and non-Hispanic (1.36 vs. 0.33, respectively; difference in change from baseline, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.23 to 1.75]; P = 0.005) cohorts. There were no adverse events during the trial.

Conclusions

The educational program increased epidural use among Hispanic women. The educational program reduced misconceptions regarding epidural analgesia in both Hispanic and non-Hispanic cohorts.

Interventions to improve participation in health-care decisions in non-Western countries: A systematic review and narrative synthesis

Background

Patients' participation in medical decision making is an important aspect of patient‐centred care. However, there is often uncertainty about its applicability and feasibility in non‐Western countries.

Objective

To provide an overview and assessment of interventions that aimed to improve patients' participation in decision making in non‐Western countries.

Method

Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Epub Ahead of Print, In‐Process, Other Non‐Indexed Citations, without Revisions and Daily Update and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, were searched from respective inception to February 2018. Studies were included if they (a) were randomized controlled trials, before‐and‐after studies and interrupted time series studies; (b) were conducted in non‐Western countries; (c) aimed to improve patients' participation in dyadic decision making; and (d) reported outcomes relevant to patient participation in decision making. Studies were excluded if they included children, were about triadic decision making or solely focused on information provision without reporting outcomes related to patient participation. Narrative synthesis method was used for data analysis and presentation.

Results

A total of 17 studies, 6 RCTs and 11 non‐RCTs, were included across ten countries. Intervention strategies included patient and/or provider communication skills training, decision aids and a question prompt material. Whilst most of the studies reported increased patient participation, those interventions which had provider or patient training in communication skills were found to be more effective.

Conclusion

Interventions to improve patient participation, within the context of dyadic decision making, in non‐Western countries can be feasible and effective if communication skills training is provided for health‐care providers and/or patients.

PRISMA and AMSTAR show systematic reviews on health literacy and cancer screening are of good quality

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews (SRs) on health literacy and cancer screening and to investigate factors that may influence overall quality.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We reviewed SRs published between 2009 and 2017. We calculated indices to represent the included SRs' adherence to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) and A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). To assess possible determinants of SRs' quality, we regressed the index scores on year and region of publication, journal impact factor, authors' reported use of PRISMA, and presence of funding statements.

RESULTS

We included 19 SRs, and median index scores were 0.86 for PRISMA (interquartile range [IQR] = 0.11; range = 0.32-1.00) and 0.67 for AMSTAR (IQR = 0.30; range = 0.22-1.00). Methodological and reporting problems pertained to protocol registration or publication, number of raters used, gray literature searches, excluded article lists, and unintegrated discussions of risk of bias and efficacy. Only journal impact factor was statistically significantly associated (positively) with PRISMA and AMSTAR index scores.

CONCLUSION

The quality of SRs on health literacy and cancer screening was generally good. Systematic reviewers should register or publish their protocols, include PRISMA and AMSTAR checklists when submitting SRs to journals, and self-evaluate their SRs before submission.

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

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

Racial and ethnic disparities in obstetric anesthesia

Racial and ethnic disparities are prevalent within healthcare and have persisted despite advances in medicine and public health. Disparities have been described in the use of neuraxial labor analgesia, with minority women being less likely to use neuraxial labor analgesia than non-minority white women. Minority women are also more likely to have a general anesthetic for cesarean delivery than non-minority women. The origins of these disparities are likely multi-factorial, with patient-, provider-, and systems-level contributors. The purpose of this article is to give an overview of disparities in obstetric anesthesia.

Addressing Barriers to Shared Decision Making Among Latino LGBTQ Patients and Healthcare Providers in Clinical Settings

Effective shared decision making (SDM) between patients and healthcare providers has been positively associated with health outcomes. However, little is known about the SDM process between Latino patients who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ), and their healthcare providers. Our review of the literature identified unique aspects of Latino LGBTQ persons' culture, health beliefs, and experiences that may affect their ability to engage in SDM with their healthcare providers. Further research needs to examine Latino LGBTQ patient-provider experiences with SDM and develop tools that can better facilitate SDM in this patient population.

A Model of Organizational Context and Shared Decision Making: Application to LGBT Racial and Ethnic Minority Patients

Shared decision making (SDM) occurs when patients and clinicians work together to reach care decisions that are both medically sound and responsive to patients' preferences and values. SDM is an important tenet of patient-centered care that can improve patient outcomes. Patients with multiple minority identities, such as sexual orientation and race/ethnicity, are at particular risk for poor SDM. Among these dual-minority patients, added challenges to clear and open communication include cultural barriers, distrust, and a health care provider's lack of awareness of the patient's minority sexual orientation or gender identity. However, organizational factors like a culture of inclusion and private space throughout the visit can improve SDM with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender ("LGBT") racial/ethnic minority patients who have faced stigma and discrimination. Most models of shared decision making focus on the patient-provider interaction, but the health care organization's context is also critical. Context-an organization's structure and operations-can strongly influence the ability and willingness of patients and clinicians to engage in shared decision making. SDM is most likely to be optimal if organizations transform their contexts and patients and providers improve their communication. Thus, we propose a conceptual model that suggests ways in which organizations can shape their contextual structure and operations to support SDM. The model contains six drivers: workflows, health information technology, organizational structure and culture, resources and clinic environment, training and education, and incentives and disincentives. These drivers work through four mechanisms to impact care: continuity and coordination, the ease of SDM, knowledge and skills, and attitudes and beliefs. These mechanisms can activate clinicians and patients to engage in high-quality SDM. We provide examples of how specific contextual changes could make SDM more effective for LGBT racial/ethnic minority populations, focusing especially on transformations that would establish a safe environment, build trust, and decrease stigma.

Development of a Conceptual Framework for Understanding Shared Decision making Among African-American LGBT Patients and their Clinicians

BACKGROUND

Enhancing patient-centered care and shared decision making (SDM) has become a national priority as a means of engaging patients in their care, improving treatment adherence, and enhancing health outcomes. Relatively little is known about the healthcare experiences or shared decision making among racial/ethnic minorities who also identify as being LGBT. The purpose of this paper is to understand how race, sexual orientation and gender identity can simultaneously influence SDM among African-American LGBT persons, and to propose a model of SDM between such patients and their healthcare providers.

METHODS

We reviewed key constructs necessary for understanding SDM among African-American LGBT persons, which guided our systematic literature review. Eligible studies for the review included English-language studies of adults (≥ 19 y/o) in North America, with a focus on LGBT persons who were African-American/black (i.e., > 50 % of the study population) or included sub-analyses by sexual orientation/gender identity and race. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, PsycINFO, and Scopus databases using MESH terms and keywords related to shared decision making, communication quality (e.g., trust, bias), African-Americans, and LGBT persons. Additional references were identified by manual reviews of peer-reviewed journals' tables of contents and key papers' references.

RESULTS

We identified 2298 abstracts, three of which met the inclusion criteria. Of the included studies, one was cross-sectional and two were qualitative; one study involved transgender women (91 % minorities, 65 % of whom were African-Americans), and two involved African-American men who have sex with men (MSM). All of the studies focused on HIV infection. Sexual orientation and gender identity were patient-reported factors that negatively impacted patient/provider relationships and SDM. Engaging in SDM helped some patients overcome normative beliefs about clinical encounters. In this paper, we present a conceptual model for understanding SDM in African-American LGBT persons, wherein multiple systems of social stratification (e.g., race, gender, sexual orientation) influence patient and provider perceptions, behaviors, and shared decision making.

DISCUSSION

Few studies exist that explore SDM among African-American LGBT persons, and no interventions were identified in our systematic review. Thus, we are unable to draw conclusions about the effect size of SDM among this population on health outcomes. Qualitative work suggests that race, sexual orientation and gender work collectively to enhance perceptions of discrimination and decrease SDM among African-American LGBT persons. More research is needed to obtain a comprehensive understanding of shared decision making and subsequent health outcomes among African-Americans along the entire spectrum of gender and sexual orientation.