A prospective cohort study of shared decision making in lung cancer diagnostics: Impact of using a patient decision aid

The impact of decision tools during oncological consultation with lung cancer patients: A systematic review within the I3LUNG project

INTRODUCTION

To date, lung cancer is one of the most lethal diagnoses worldwide. A variety of lung cancer treatments and modalities are available, which are generally presented during the patient and doctor consultation. The implementation of decision tools to facilitate patient's decision-making and the management of their healthcare process during medical consultation is fundamental. Studies have demonstrated that decision tools are helpful to promote health management and decision-making of lung cancer patients during consultations. The main aim of the present work within the I3LUNG project is to systematically review the implementation of decision tools to facilitate medical consultation about oncological treatments for lung cancer patients.

METHODS

In the present study, we conducted a systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines. We used an electronic computer-based search involving three databases, as follows: Embase, PubMed, and Scopus. 10 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included. They explicitly refer to decision tools in the oncological context, with lung cancer patients.

RESULTS

The discussion highlights the most encouraging results about the positive role of decision aids during medical consultations about oncological treatments, especially regarding anxiety, decision-making, and patient knowledge. However, no one main decision aid tool emerged as essential. Opting for a more recent timeframe to select eligible articles might shed light on the current array of decision aid tools available.

CONCLUSION

Future review efforts could utilize alternative search strategies to explore other lung cancer-specific outcomes during medical consultations for treatment decisions and the implementation of decision aid tools. Engaging with experts in the fields of oncology, patient decision-making, or health communication could provide valuable insights and recommendations for relevant literature or research directions that may not be readily accessible through traditional search methods. The development of guidelines for future research were provided with the aim to promote decision aids focused on patients' needs.

Shared decision making with breast cancer patients - does it work? Results of the cluster-randomized, multicenter DBCG RT SDM trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Shared decision making (SDM) is a patient engaging process advocated especially for preference-sensitive decisions, such as adjuvant treatment after breast cancer. An increasing call for patient engagement in decision making highlights the need for a systematic SDM approach. The objective of this trial was to investigate whether the Decision Helper (DH), an in-consultation patient decision aid, increases patient engagement in decisions regarding adjuvant whole breast irradiation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Oncologists at four radiotherapy units were randomized to practice SDM using the DH versus usual practice. Patient candidates for adjuvant whole breast irradiation after breast conserving surgery for node-negative breast cancer were eligible. The primary endpoint was patient-reported engagement in the decision process assessed with the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) (range 0-100, 4 points difference considered clinical relevant). Other endpoints included oncologist-reported patient engagement, decisional conflict, fear of cancer recurrence, and decision regret after 6 months.

RESULTS

Of the 674 included patients, 635 (94.2%) completed the SDM-Q-9. Patients in the intervention group reported higher level of engagement (median 80; IQR 68.9 to 94.4) than the control group (71.1; IQR 55.6 to 82.2; p < 0.0001). Oncologist-reported patient engagement was higher in the invention group (93.3; IQR 82.2 to 100) compared to control group (73.3; IQR 60.0 to 84.4) (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Patient engagement in medical decision making was significantly improved with the use of an in-consultation patient decision aid compared to standard. The DH on adjuvant whole breast irradiation is now recommended as standard of care in the Danish guideline.

The Role of Smoking Status in Making Risk-Informed Diagnostic Decisions in the Lung Cancer Pathway: A Qualitative Study of Health Care Professionals and Patients

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer clinical guidelines and risk tools often rely on smoking history as a significant risk factor. However, never-smokers make up 14% of the lung cancer population, and this proportion is rising. Consequently, they are often perceived as low-risk and may experience diagnostic delays. This study aimed to explore how clinicians make risk-informed diagnostic decisions for never-smokers.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were conducted with 10 lung cancer diagnosticians, supported by data from interviews with 20 never-smoker lung cancer patients. The data were analyzed using a framework analysis based on the Model of Pathways to Treatment framework and data-driven interpretations.

RESULTS

Participants described 3 main strategies for making risk-informed decisions incorporating smoking status: guidelines, heuristics, and potential harms. Clinicians supplemented guidelines with their own heuristics for never-smokers, such as using higher thresholds for chest X-ray. Decisions were easier for patients with high-risk symptoms such as hemoptysis. Clinicians worried about overinvestigating never-smoker patients, particularly in terms of physical and psychological harms from invasive procedures or radiation. To minimize unnecessary anxiety about lung cancer risk, clinicians made efforts to downplay this. Conversely, some patients found that this caused process harms such as delays and miscommunications.

CONCLUSION

Improved guidance and methods of risk differentiation for never-smokers are needed to avoid diagnostic delays, overreassurance, and clinical pessimism. This requires an improved evidence base and initiatives to increase awareness among clinicians of the incidence of lung cancer in never-smokers. As the proportion of never-smoker patients increases, this issue will become more urgent.

HIGHLIGHTS

Smoking status is the most common risk factor used by clinicians to guide decision making, and guidelines often focus on this factor.Some clinicians also use their own heuristics for never-smokers, and this becomes particularly relevant for patients with lower risk symptoms.Clinicians are also concerned about the potential harms and risks associated with deploying resources on diagnostics for never-smokers.Some patients find it difficult to decide whether or not to go ahead with certain procedures due to efforts made by clinicians to downplay the risk of lung cancer.Overall, the study highlights the complex interplay between smoking history, clinical decision making, and patient anxiety in the context of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Development, implementation and evaluation of patient decision aids supporting shared decision making in women with recurrent ovarian cancer

Objective

Shared decision making (SDM) and use of patient decision aids (PtDAs) are key components in patient-centered care in relapsed ovarian cancer. This paper describes the development and implementation process of PtDAs into a clinical routine in three departments.

Methods

Two PtDAs were developed in collaboration between patients and clinicians. Acceptability and usability of the PtDAs were tested on clinicians and patients using items from the internationally validated questionnaire "Preparation for Decision Making Scale".

Results

Ten patients and 15 clinicians participated in the study. Most patients indicated that PtDAs would be helpful as preparation for the decision-making process with the clinicians. Ten (75%) of the clinicians responded that the PtDAs helped the patients to understand the benefits and disadvantages of each treatment option. Generally, the clinicians indicated that they would use SDM if they had a PtDA tailored to the clinical situation.

Conclusions

Two PtDAs were systematically developed, tested, and implemented thereby supporting an SDM intervention. The PtDAs are still in use at the participating departments.

Innovation

This study was successful in reusing a generic template for a patient decision aid (PtDA) developed at one institution and implemented in two other institutions. This was guided by a well-described systematic development process for PtDAs.

"SDM:HOSP"- a generic model for hospital-based implementation of shared decision making

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is a core element in the meeting between patient and healthcare professionals, but has proved difficult to implement and sustain in routine clinical practice. One of five Danish regions set out to succeed and to develop a model that ensures lasting SDM based on learnings from large-scale real-world implementation initiatives that go beyond the 'barriers' and 'facilitators' research approach. This paper describes this process and development of a generic implementation model, SDM:HOSP.

METHODS

This project was carried out in the Region of Southern Denmark with five major hospital units. Based on existing theory of SDM, SDM implementation, implementation science and improvement methodology, a process of four phases were described; development of conceptual elements, field-testing, evaluation, and development of the final implementation model. The conceptual elements developed aimed to prepare leaders, train SDM teachers, teach clinicians to perform SDM, support development of patient decision aids, and support systematic planning, execution and follow-up. Field testing was done including continuous participant evaluations and an overall evaluation after one year.

RESULTS

Data from field testing and learnings from the implementation process, illustrated the need for a dynamic and easy adjustable model. The final SDM:HOSP model included four themes; i)Training of Leaders, ii) Training of Teachers and Clinicians, iii) Decision Helper, and iv) 'Process', each with details in three levels, 1) shared elements, 2) recommendations, and 3) local adaption.

CONCLUSIONS

A feasible and acceptable model for implementation of SDM across hospitals and departments that accounts for different organizations and cultures was developed. The overall design can easily be adapted to other organizations and can be adjusted to fit the specific organization and culture. The results from the ongoing and overall evaluation suggest promising avenues for future work in further testing and research of the usability of the model.

Measures used to assess interventions for increasing patient involvement in Danish healthcare setting: a rapid review

OBJECTIVE

To identify measures used within Denmark evaluating any type of intervention designed to facilitate patient involvement in healthcare.

DESIGN

Environmental scan employing rapid review methods.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PsycInfo and CINAHL were searched from 6-9 April 2021 from database inception up to the date of the search.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Quantitative, observational and mixed methods studies with empirical data on outcomes used to assess any type of intervention aiming to increase patient involvement with their healthcare. Language limitations were Danish and English.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data from 10% of the included studies and, due to their agreement, the data from the rest were extracted by first author. Data were analysed with reference to existing categories of measuring person-centred care; findings were synthesised using narrative summaries. Adapted Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines were used to guide reporting.

RESULTS

Among 3767 records, 43 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 74 different measures used to evaluate interventions aimed at increasing patient involvement within healthcare in Danish hospital and community settings. Generic measures assessed: patient engagement (n=3); supporting self-management (n=8); supporting shared decision-making (n=9); patient satisfaction and experiences of care (n=11); health-related patient-reported outcome (n=20).

CONCLUSIONS

Across Denmark, complex interventions designed to improve patient involvement with healthcare vary in their goals and content. Some targeting healthcare professionals, some patient health literacy and some service infrastructure. A plethora of measures assess the impact of these interventions on patient, professional and service delivery outcomes. Few measures assessed patient involvement directly, and it is unclear which proxy measures capture indicators of perceived involvement. Lack of conceptual clarity between intervention goals, the components of change and measures makes it difficult to see what types of intervention can best support change in services to ensure patients are more effectively involved in their healthcare.

Shared decision making in recurrent ovarian cancer: Implementation of patient decision aids across three departments of oncology in Denmark

Objective

Patients with relapsed ovarian cancer are offered multiple treatment options. To match treatment with the individual patient's life situation and preferences, healthcare professionals can apply shared decision making (SDM) including patient decision aids (PtDAs).This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of two different PtDAs in consultations with patients suffering from relapsed ovarian cancer.

Methods

We analyzed the following data before and after implementation of the PtDAs: 1) observed SDM using the OPTION instrument, 2) physician treatment recommendations, and 3) patients' and physicians' evaluations of SDM in consultations using the CollaboRATE, SDM-Q-9, and SDM-Q-Doc.

Results

Significant improvement in observed SDM was found after the implementation (p = 0.002). Improvement of SDM was detected in consultations conducted by physicians reporting more than two hours of SDM-training (p < 0.001), but not when physicians reported less than two hours of SDM-training.No before/after differences in treatment recommendations and in patients' and physicians' evaluations were found.

Conclusion

Implementation of PtDAs improved the level of observed SDM. Training of physicians in SDM is necessary for improved SDM practice.

Innovation

Discussing oncological treatment options with the use of PtDAs is not standard practice in Denmark. The present study is one of the first Danish studies focusing on how to implement SDM and PtDAs in oncological consultations.

Leveraging the timing and frequency of patient decision aids in longitudinal shared decision-making: A narrative review and applied model

Introduction

Shared decision‐making (SDM) is intended to increase patient‐centredness of medical decision‐making for patients with acute and chronic conditions. Concurrently, patient decision aids (PtDAs) can supplement SDM by providing information to guide communication between patients and healthcare providers. Because of the prevalence of chronic conditions, where decisions may be extended or recurring, we sought to explore how effectively these tools have been leveraged in this context.

Methods

We conducted a narrative review of the literature on both SDM and PtDAs, searching PubMed and Boston University's library database search tool for English‐language articles published from January 2005 until March 2021. Additional search terms focused on temporality. Drawing from our findings, we developed a combined framework to highlight areas for future research using the discussion of end‐of‐life decisions as an exemplar to illustrate its relevance to chronic care contexts.

Results

After screening 57 articles, we identified 25 articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria on SDM, PtDA use and temporality for chronic care. The literature on SDM highlighted time outside of the medical visit and opportunity to include outside decision partners as important elements of the process. PtDAs were commonly evaluated for process‐related and proximal outcomes, but less often for distal outcomes. Early evidence points to the value of comparative outcome evaluation based on the timing of PtDA distribution.

Conclusion

Our review of the literature on SDM and PtDAs reveals less attention to the timing of PtDAs relative to that of SDM. We highlight the need for further study of timing in PtDA use to improve longitudinal SDM for chronic care. The model that we propose in our discussion provides a starting point for future research on PtDA efficacy.

Patient or Public Contribution

Five patient consultants provided input and feedback on the development and utility of our model.

Implementation of patient-centred care in Denmark: The way forward with shared decision-making

LEGAL AND POLITICAL LANDSCAPE IN SHARED DECISION MAKING

Current Danish legislation empowers patients in securing their rights, but there are no present legislative developments in Denmark to support patient involvement. Policy initiatives within health care, however, show positive trends by, for example, including recommendations for shared decision making (SDM) in national clinical guidelines and the allocation of resources to fund projects in SDM. Within the last five years, three out of five regions have launched centers in patient involvement and SDM to focus on training, implementation of patient decision aids (PtDAs) and to foster the cultural change in SDM. A national dissemination of a template for easy building of PtDAs accessible via an online platform is one of the latest initiatives.

THE WAY FORWARD

Although the political discourse on SDM is gathering speed, an unclear definition and purpose of SDM is a barrier to real-life implementation. Politicians, leaders and clinicians seem to be moving at different paces and in different directions and are lacking consensus on SDM as a paradigm requiring training, leadership and a patient-centered mindset.

CONCLUSION

Many relevant initiatives are underway. However, SDM is also challenged by the lack of legislation and a central push for real SDM implementation in Denmark.

Prediction of recovery in trauma patients using Latent Markov models

PURPOSE

Patients' expectations during recovery after a trauma can affect the recovery. The aim of the present study was to identify different physical recovery trajectories based on Latent Markov Models (LMMs) and predict these recovery states based on individual patient characteristics.

METHODS

The data of a cohort of adult trauma patients until the age of 75 years with a length of hospital stay of 3 days and more were derived from the Brabant Injury Outcome Surveillance (BIOS) study. The EuroQol-5D 3-level version and the Health Utilities Index were used 1 week, and 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after injury. Four prediction models, for mobility, pain, self-care, and daily activity, were developed using LMMs with ordinal latent states and patient characteristics as predictors for the latent states.

RESULTS

In total, 1107 patients were included. Four models with three ordinal latent states were developed, with different covariates in each model. The prediction of the (ordinal) latent states in the LMMs yielded pseudo-R² values between 40 and 53% and between 21 and 41% (depending of the type R² used) and classification errors between 24 and 40%. Most patients seem to recover fast as only about a quarter of the patients remain with severe problems after 1 month.

CONCLUSION

The use of LMMs to model the development of physical function post-injury is a promising way to obtain a prediction of the physical recovery. The step-by-step prediction fits well with the outpatient follow-up and it can be used to inform the patients more tailor-made to manage the expectations.

Practitioners' views on shared decision-making implementation: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Shared decision-making (SDM) refers to the collaboration between patients and their healthcare providers to make clinical decisions based on evidence and patient preferences, often supported by patient decision aids (PDAs). This study explored practitioner experiences of SDM in a context where SDM has been successfully implemented. Specifically, we focused on practitioners' perceptions of SDM as a paradigm, factors influencing implementation success, and outcomes.

METHODS

We used a qualitative approach to examine the experiences and perceptions of 10 Danish practitioners at a cancer hospital experienced in SDM implementation. A semi-structured interview format was used and interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data was analyzed through thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Prior to SDM implementation, participants had a range of attitudes from skeptical to receptive. Those with more direct long-term contact with patients (such as nurses) were more positive about the need for SDM. We identified four main factors that influenced SDM implementation success: raising awareness of SDM behaviors among clinicians through concrete measurements, supporting the formation of new habits through reinforcement mechanisms, increasing the flexibility of PDA delivery, and strong leadership. According to our participants, these factors were instrumental in overcoming initial skepticism and solidifying new SDM behaviors. Improvements to the clinical process were reported. Sustaining and transferring the knowledge gained to other contexts will require adapting measurement tools.

CONCLUSIONS

Applying SDM in clinical practice represents a major shift in mindset for clinicians. Designing SDM initiatives with an understanding of the underlying behavioral mechanisms may increase the probability of successful and sustained implementation.

Integration of patient-centered care in nutrition support decision-making: A case report

Patient-centered care considers a patient's unique needs, values, preferences, and the psychosocial situation at the heart of decisions related to healthcare. Dietitians have reported several barriers to the practice of patient-centered care, including a lack of time and support and a perception that patients are unable to participate. This is meaningful as decisions regarding nutrition therapy, specifically in adult populations with cancer, influence patient morbidity and mortality and a patient's quality of life. Patient-centered care is associated with improved decision-making, patient-provider communication, and quality of life in patients with cancer. This case report discusses and applies patient-centered care in conjunction with the best available evidence for an adult patient with a history of head and neck cancer admitted to a critical care unit. Nutrition support clinicians are equipped to use a patient-centered and evidence-based approach to help patients navigate through nutrition therapy decisions that may influence both clinical and quality of life outcomes. Further research should be done to determine the association between patient-centered care and quality of life outcomes in nutrition support practice.

Lung Cancer Screening Policy in Alaska and Occupational Therapy

Lung cancer claims more lives than any other cancer in the world and remains difficult to diagnose in the early stages. This article examines the current state of lung cancer detection and screening via low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) in Alaska and considers potential opportunities for occupational therapy practitioners in primary care settings. Medicare requires at least one documented shared decision-making encounter between provider and patient before LDCT lung cancer screening occurs. As a result of time constraints, documentation requirements, and the plethora of preventive health services they provide, primary care physicians often lack the time and training to conduct this essential service. This provides an opportunity for occupational therapy practitioners to perform these services as part of their practice and to play a role in this area as patient educators and prevention specialists in primary care settings. What This Article Adds: This article explores the national health crisis of lung cancer and describes how occupational therapists can participate in providing care in primary care settings.

Improving Care for Patients With Stage III or IV NSCLC: Learnings for Multidisciplinary Teams From the ACCC National Quality Survey

PURPOSE

Insufficient characterization of the optimal multidisciplinary team and lack of understanding of barriers to quality care are unmet needs in the management of stage III or IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A national survey was conducted to inform the design and execution of process improvement plans and address identified barriers.

METHODS

A steering committee of multidisciplinary specialists and representation from patient advocacy collaborated for a comprehensive, double-blind, web-based survey (January-April 2019) to obtain insights on care delivery for patients with advanced NSCLC in a diverse set of US community cancer programs.

RESULTS

Overall, 639 responses (160 unique cancer programs across 44 US states) were included; 41% (n = 261) of respondents indicated an absence of a thoracic multidisciplinary clinic in their cancer program. Engagement in shared decision making was significantly associated with the presence of navigation and radiation oncology disciplines (P ≤ .04); 19.2% and 33.3% of respondents belonged to cancer programs with no lung cancer screening and no protocol for biomarker testing, respectively. The frequency of tumor board meetings negatively correlated with time to complete disease staging (P = .03); the average time to first therapeutic intervention in newly diagnosed patients was 4 weeks. The most challenging barriers to quality care included insufficient quantity of biopsy material for biomarker testing, lack of primary care provider referrals, and diagnostic costs.

CONCLUSION

Improving the quality of advanced NSCLC care, including optimization of a multidisciplinary team framework, may surmount barriers to care coordination, diagnosis and staging, and treatment planning, consequently improving adherence to evolving standards of care.

Physician-patient communication affects patient satisfaction in treatment decision-making: a structural equation modelling analysis of a web-based survey in patients with ulcerative colitis

BACKGROUND

The relationship of bidirectional sharing of information between physicians and patients to patient satisfaction with treatment decision-making for ulcerative colitis (UC) has not been examined. Here, we conducted a web-based survey to evaluate this relationship.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥ 20 years with UC were recruited from the IBD Patient Panel and Japanese IBD Patient Association. Patients completed our web-based survey between 11 May and 1 June 2020. The main outcomes were patient satisfaction (assessed by the Decision Regret Scale) and patient trust in physicians (assessed by the Trust in Physician Scale).

RESULTS

In this study (n = 457), a structural equation modelling analysis showed that physician-to-patient and patient-to-physician information significantly affected patient satisfaction with treatment decision-making (standardised path coefficient: 0.426 and 0.135, respectively) and patient trust in physicians (0.587 and 0.158, respectively). Notably, physician-to-patient information had a greater impact. For patient satisfaction with treatment decision-making and patient trust in physicians, information on "disease" (indirect effect: 0.342 and 0.471, respectively), "treatment" (0.335 and 0.461, respectively), and "endoscopy" (0.295 and 0.407, respectively) was particularly important, and the level of this information was adequate or almost adequate. Patient-to-physician information on "anxiety and distress" (0.116 and 0.136, respectively), "intention and desire for treatment" (0.113 and 0.132, respectively), and "future expectations of life" (0.104 and 0.121, respectively) were also important for patient satisfaction with treatment decision-making and patient trust in physicians, but these concerns were not adequately communicated.

CONCLUSIONS

Adequate physician-patient communication, especially physician-to-patient information, enhanced patient satisfaction with treatment decision-making for UC.

Making shared decision-making (SDM) a reality: protocol of a large-scale long-term SDM implementation programme at a Northern German University Hospital

INTRODUCTION

Shared decision-making (SDM) is not yet widely used when making decisions in German hospitals. Making SDM a reality is a complex task. It involves training healthcare professionals in SDM communication and enabling patients to actively participate in communication, in addition to providing sound, easy to understand information on treatment alternatives in the form of evidence-based patient decision aids (EbPDAs). This project funded by the German Innovation Fund aims at designing, implementing and evaluating a multicomponent, large-scale and integrative SDM programme-called SHARE TO CARE (S2C)-at all clinical departments of a University Hospital Campus in Northern Germany within a 4-year time period.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

S2C tackles the aforementioned components of SDM: (1) training physicians in SDM communication, (2) activating and empowering patients, (3) developing EbPDAs in the most common/relevant diseases and (4) training other healthcare professionals in SDM coaching. S2C is designed together with patients and providers. The physicians' training programme entails an online and an in situ training module. The decision coach training is based on a similar but less comprehensive approach. The development of online EbPDAs follows the International Patient Decision Aid Standards and includes written, graphical and video-based information. Validated outcomes of SDM implementation are measured in a preintervention and postintervention evaluation design. Process evaluation accompanies programme implementation. Health economic impact of the intervention is investigated using a propensity-score-matched approach based on potentially preference-sensitive hospital decisions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics committee review approval has been obtained from Medical Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty of the Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel. Project information and results will be disseminated at conferences, on project-hosted websites at University Hospital Medical Center Schleswig Holstein and by S2C as well as in peer-reviewed and professional journals.

Assessment of medical students' shared decision-making skills in simulated physician-patient encounters

OBJECTIVE

To compare shared decision-making skills of medical students who voluntarily translate medical documents into plain language with students who do not participate in this voluntary task.

METHODS

29 medical students who voluntarily translated medical documents for patients into plain language on the online-platform https://washabich.de (WHI group) and 29 medical students who did not (non-WHI group) participated in a simulated virtual consultation hour. Via skype, participants communicated with six simulated patients. All conversations were transcribed and a blinded rater assessed them with the OPTION scale for shared decision-making.

RESULTS

The WHI group received significantly (p < .001) higher total scores for shared decision-making with the OPTION scale than the non-WHI group. The greatest differences in scores were found for the items "The clinician checks that the patient has understood the information." (WHI: 2.98 ± 0.77 vs. non-WHI: 2.61 ± 0.89, p < .001) and "The clinician offers the patient explicit opportunities to ask questions during the decision-making process." (WHI: 2.83 ± 1.00 vs. non-WHI: 2.40 ± 1.07, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Written translation of medical documents is associated with significantly better OPTION scores for shared decision-making in simulated physician-patient encounters.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

To use written medial translation exercises in general to improve medical students' shared decision-making skills.

The impact of a patient decision aid on shared decision-making behaviour in oncology care and pulmonary medicine-A field study based on real-life observations

OBJECTIVE

A patient decision aid (PtDA) is often developed and evaluated to support shared decision making (SDM) and a patient-centred approach. In this study, a PtDA template was developed to support two different preference sensitive decisions: adjuvant therapy for breast cancer and diagnostic workup for lung cancer. The aim of the study was to explore whether a PtDA improved SDM and supported a patient-centred approach from an observational point of view.

METHODS

Real-life observations were conducted using the validated observational instrument OPTION 12. Three nurses conducted observations of consultations in two different clinical settings. The study consisted of a baseline cohort (phase 1) and an intervention cohort (phase 2). In phase 1, standard consultations were observed. Subsequently, the PtDA was introduced, and in phase 2, consultations with the clinician using the PtDA were observed.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine observations were conducted in phase 1 and 24 in phase 2. Using a PtDA increased the overall OPTION score significantly (P < .0001), both in decisions on adjuvant treatment for breast cancer and on diagnostic workup of lung cancer. Items in the OPTION instrument regarding systematic conversation to obtain SDM had a higher increase of scores compared to items regarding a patient-centred approach.

CONCLUSION

Real-life observations and the use of a validated observational tool provided comprehensive knowledge as to how a PtDA affects SDM in consultations. Applying a PtDA resulted in a significant overall increase of SDM behaviour in decisions on adjuvant treatment after breast cancer surgery and diagnostic workup in case of a small suspicion of lung cancer. In conclusion, the PtDA supports SDM in consultations independently of type of decision and department.