Measuring triadic decision making in older patients with multiple chronic conditions: Observer OPTIONMCC

Associations between physicians' SDM behaviour and participation of older patients and family members in triadic decision-making: An observational study

Background

Medical consultations with older patients often include triadic conversations and decision-making processes involving physicians, patients, and family members. The presence of family members may change the communication dynamics and therefore increase the complexity of the consultation and decision-making process.

Objective

This study explored associations between physicians' shared decision-making (SDM) behaviour and patients' and family members' participation in the decision-making process.

Methods

Using an observational design, we analysed 95 recorded consultations between medical specialists, patients aged ≥65 years, and accompanying family members at a Dutch hospital. The OPTIONMCC was used to assess the physicians' SDM behaviour and patients' and family members' levels of involvement in SDM.

Results

We found a strong positive correlation between physicians' behaviour and patients' and family members' participation in SDM (0.68 and 0.64, respectively, p < .01). Family members were more involved in SDM for patients aged 80 and older.

Conclusion

While not asserting causation, our study suggests physicians potentially play a facilitating role in shaping the SDM process together with proactive contributions from patients and family members.

Innovation

The results offer new insights into triadic SDM and provide suggestions for refining the OPTIONMCC. Further research is recommended into participants' mutual directional influences in triadic SDM.

The influence of health literacy, anxiety and education on shared decision making and decisional conflict in older adults, and the mediating role of patient participation: A video observational study

OBJECTIVE

To explore the relationship between personal characteristics of older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) and perceived shared decision making (SDM) resp. decisional conflict.

METHODS

In a video-observational study (N = 213) data were collected on personal characteristics. The main outcomes were perceived level of SDM and decisional conflict. The mediating variable was participation in the SDM process. A twostep mixed effect multilinear regression and a mediation analysis were performed to analyze the data.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 77.3 years and 56.3% were female. Health literacy (β.01, p < .001) was significantly associated with participation in the SDM process. Education (β = -2.43, p = .05) and anxiety (β = -.26, p = .058) had a marginally significant direct effect on the patients' perceived level of SDM. Education (β = 12.12, p = .002), health literacy (β = -.70, p = .005) and anxiety (β = 1.19, p = .004) had a significant direct effect on decisional conflict. The effect of health literacy on decisional conflict was mediated by participation in SDM.

CONCLUSION

Health literacy, anxiety and education are associated with decisional conflict. Participation in SDM during consultations plays a mediating role in the relationship between health literacy and decisional conflict.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Tailoring SDM communication to health literacy levels is important for high quality SDM.

Involvement of family members of older patients with cancer in triadic decision-making processes during medical consultations on an outpatient ward - an observational exploratory study using quantitative and qualitative methods

INTRODUCTION

There is a growing interest in the involvement of family members of older patients with cancer in decision-making processes. The aim of this study is to identify how and to what extent family members, together with patients and physicians, are involved in triadic decision-making processes in clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted using an exploratory observational design. The Observer Patient Involvement Scale for patients with Multiple Chronicle Conditions (OPTIONMCC) was used to assess the interaction in triadic decision-making between patients, family members, and physicians. Physicians' behaviour was scored on a Likert-scale ranging from 0 (not observed) to 4 (executed to a high standard), while the behaviour of patients and their family members was scored on a scale from 0 (no or minimum participation) to 2 (active participation). Atlas.ti software was used to facilitate coding, and the SPSS statistical analysis platform was used to explore correlations between the shared decision-making (SDM) skills of the physician and the participation of patients and their family members.

RESULTS

In total, ten physicians performed 25 consultations with older patients and 30 family members. Patients showed higher levels of participation in the SDM process than family members (OPTIONMCC mean scores 0.96 vs 0.61). Physicians' SDM skills were observed at a low or moderate skill level (OPTIONMCC mean score 1.81). Exploratory correlation analysis showed that higher physician scores were related to higher levels of both patients' and family members' involvement in the decision-making process. The level of family members' involvement in SDM varied from no involvement at all to active involvement. Qualitative analysis of family involvement revealed that relatives are likely to: emphasize patients' values and goals of care; inquire about different treatment options; assist in the deliberation process; and ask for clarification of the further medical process. Physicians showed responsive behaviour towards family members but seldom actively involved them in the SDM process.

DISCUSSION

The study findings suggest that there is a need to include strategies to facilitate family involvement in current SDM models for older patients with cancer. Healthcare professionals in geriatric oncology might benefit from additional training covering family dynamics and managing challenging situations.

Patient values in patient-provider communication about participation in early phase clinical cancer trials: a qualitative analysis before and after implementation of an online value clarification tool intervention

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced cancer who no longer have standard treatment options available may decide to participate in early phase clinical trials (i.e. experimental treatments with uncertain outcomes). Shared decision-making (SDM) models help to understand considerations that influence patients' decision. Discussion of patient values is essential to SDM, but such communication is often limited in this context and may require new interventions. The OnVaCT intervention, consisting of a preparatory online value clarification tool (OnVaCT) for patients and communication training for oncologists, was previously developed to support SDM. This study aimed to qualitatively explore associations between patient values that are discussed between patients and oncologists during consultations about potential participation in early phase clinical trials before and after implementation of the OnVaCT intervention.

METHODS

This study is part of a prospective multicentre nonrandomized controlled clinical trial and had a between-subjects design: pre-intervention patients received usual care, while post-intervention patients additionally received the OnVaCT. Oncologists participated in the communication training between study phases. Patients' initial consultation on potential early phase clinical trial participation was recorded and transcribed verbatim. Applying a directed approach, two independent coders analysed the transcripts using an initial codebook based on previous studies. Steps of continuous evaluation and revision were repeated until data saturation was reached.

RESULTS

Data saturation was reached after 32 patient-oncologist consultations (i.e. 17 pre-intervention and 15 post-intervention). The analysis revealed the values: hope, perseverance, quality or quantity of life, risk tolerance, trust in the healthcare system/professionals, autonomy, social adherence, altruism, corporeality, acceptance of one's fate, and humanity. Patients in the pre-intervention phase tended to express values briefly and spontaneously. Oncologists acknowledged the importance of patients' values, but generally only gave 'contrasting' examples of why some accept and others refuse to participate in trials. In the post-intervention phase, many oncologists referred to the OnVaCT and/or asked follow-up questions, while patients used longer phrases that combined multiple values, sometimes clearly indicating their weighing.

CONCLUSIONS

While all values were recognized in both study phases, our results have highlighted the different communication patterns around patient values in SDM for potential early phase clinical trial participation before and after implementation of the OnVaCT intervention. This study therefore provides a first (qualitative) indication that the OnVaCT intervention may support patients and oncologists in discussing their values.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Registry: NL7335, registered on July 17, 2018.

Accentuating patient values in shared decision-making: A mixed methods development of an online value clarification tool and communication training in the context of early phase clinical cancer trials

OBJECTIVE

In the shared decision-making (SDM) process for potential early phase clinical cancer trial participation, value clarification is highly recommended. However, exploration and discussion of patient values between patients and oncologists remains limited. This study aims to develop an SDM-supportive intervention, consisting of a preparatory online value clarification tool (OnVaCT) and a communication training.

METHODS

The OnVaCT intervention was developed and pilot-tested by combining theoretical notions on value clarification, with interview studies with patients and oncologists, focus groups with patient representatives and oncologists, and think aloud sessions with patients, following the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for complex interventions. These human-centered methodologies enabled a user-centered approach at every step of the development process of the intervention.

RESULTS

This study shows relevant patient values and oncologists' perspectives on value exploration and discussion in daily practice. This has been combined with theoretical considerations into the creation of characters based on real-life experiences of patients in the OnVaCT, and how the tool is combined with a communication training for oncologists to improve SDM.

Effects of a clinical decision support system and patient portal for preventing medication-related falls in older fallers: Protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial with embedded process and economic evaluations (ADFICE_IT)

BACKGROUND

Falls are the leading cause of injury-related mortality and hospitalization among adults aged ≥ 65 years. An important modifiable fall-risk factor is use of fall-risk increasing drugs (FRIDs). However, deprescribing is not always attempted or performed successfully. The ADFICE_IT trial evaluates the combined use of a clinical decision support system (CDSS) and a patient portal for optimizing the deprescribing of FRIDs in older fallers. The intervention aims to optimize and enhance shared decision making (SDM) and consequently prevent injurious falls and reduce healthcare-related costs.

METHODS

A multicenter, cluster-randomized controlled trial with process evaluation will be conducted among hospitals in the Netherlands. We aim to include 856 individuals aged ≥ 65 years that visit the falls clinic due to a fall. The intervention comprises the combined use of a CDSS and a patient portal. The CDSS provides guideline-based advice with regard to deprescribing and an individual fall-risk estimation, as calculated by an embedded prediction model. The patient portal provides educational information and a summary of the patient's consultation. Hospitals in the control arm will provide care-as-usual. Fall-calendars will be used for measuring the time to first injurious fall (primary outcome) and secondary fall outcomes during one year. Other measurements will be conducted at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months and include quality of life, cost-effectiveness, feasibility, and shared decision-making measures. Data will be analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Difference in time to injurious fall between the intervention and control group will be analyzed using multilevel Cox regression.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this study will add valuable insights about how digital health informatics tools that target physicians and older adults can optimize deprescribing and support SDM. We expect the CDSS and patient portal to aid in deprescribing of FRIDs, resulting in a reduction in falls and related injuries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05449470 (7-7-2022).

Effects of a shared decision making intervention for older adults with multiple chronic conditions: the DICO study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effects of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs).

METHODS

A pragmatic trial evaluated the effects of the SDM^MCC intervention, existing of SDM training for nine geriatricians in two hospitals and a preparatory tool for patients. A prospective pre-intervention post-intervention multi-center clinical study was conducted in which an usual care group of older patients with MCC and their informal caregivers was included before the implementation of the intervention and a new cohort of patients and informal caregivers after the implementation of the intervention. SDM was observed using the OPTION^MCC during video-recorded consultations. Patient- and caregivers reported outcomes regarding their role in SDM, involvement, perceived SDM and decisional conflict were measured. The differences between groups regarding the level of observed SDM (OPTION^MCC) were analyzed with a mixed model analysis. Dichotomous patient-reported outcomes were analyzed with a logistic mixed model.

RESULTS

From two outpatient geriatric clinics 216 patients with MCCs participated. The mean age was 77.3 years, and 56.3% of patients were female. No significant difference was found in the overall level of SDM as measured with the OPTION^MCC or in patient-reported outcomes. However, at item level the items discussing 'goals', 'options', and 'decision making' significantly improved after the intervention. The items discussing 'partnership' and 'evaluating the decision-making process' showed a significant decrease. Fifty-two percent of the patients completed the preparatory tool, but the results were only discussed in 12% of the consultations.

CONCLUSION

This study provides scope for improvement of SDM in geriatrics. Engaging older adults with MCCs and informal caregivers in the decision making process should be an essential part of SDM training for geriatricians, beyond the SDM steps of explaining options, benefits and harms. More attention should be paid to the integration of preparatory work in the consultation.

Video-based observation research: A systematic review of studies in outpatient health care settings

OBJECTIVE

To examine the use of video-based observation research in outpatient health care encounter research.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane and other databases from database inception to October 2020 for reports of studies that used video recording to investigate ambulatory patient-clinician interactions. Two authors independently reviewed all studies for eligibility and extracted information related to study setting and purpose, participant recruitment and consent processes, data collection procedures, method of analysis, and participant sample characteristics.

RESULTS

175 articles were included. Most studies (65%) took place in a primary care or family practice setting. Study objectives were overwhelmingly focused on patient-clinician communication (81%). Reporting of key study elements was inconsistent across included studies.

CONCLUSION

Video recording has been used as a research method in outpatient health care in a limited number and scope of clinical contexts and research domains. In addition, reporting of study design, methodological characteristics, and ethical considerations needs improvement.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Video recording as a method has been relatively underutilized within many clinical and research contexts. This review will serve as a practical resource for health care researchers as they plan and execute future video-based studies.

Bringing personal perspective elicitation to the heart of shared decision-making: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Proponents of shared decision-making (SDM) advocate the elicitation of the patient's perspective. This scoping review explores if, and to what extent, the personal perspectives of patients are elicited during a clinical encounter, as part of a SDM process. We define personal perspective elicitation (PPE) as: the disclosure (either elicited by the clinician or spontaneously expressed by the patient) of information related to the patient's personal preferences, values and/or context.

METHODS

A search was conducted in five literature databases from inception dates up to July 2020, to identify empirical studies about SDM (with/without SDM instrument).

RESULTS

The search identified 4562 abstracts; 263 articles were read in full text, resulting in 99 included studies. Studies reported low levels of PPE. Integration of personal perspectives into the conversation or a future care plan was largely absent. The majority of the discussed content related to physical health, while social and psychological topics were mostly unaddressed.

CONCLUSIONS

PPE occurs on a very low level in efforts to achieve SDM according to evaluation studies.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

PPE is advocated but rarely achieved in SDM evaluation studies. Causes should be identified, followed by designing interventions to improve this aspect of SDM.

Intergenerational Decision Making: The Role of Family Relationships in Medical Decision Making

A symposium held at the 42nd annual Society for Medical Decision Making conference on October 26, 2020, focused on intergenerational decision making. The symposium covered existing research and clinical experiences using formal presentations and moderated discussion and was attended by 43 people. Presentations focused on the roles of pediatric patients in decision making, caregiver decision making for a child with complex medical needs, caregiver involvement in advanced care planning, and the inclusion of spillover effects in economic evaluations. The moderated discussion, summarized in this article, highlighted existing resources and gaps in intergenerational decision making in four areas: decision aids, economic evaluation, participant perspectives, and measures. Intergenerational decision making is an understudied and poorly understood aspect of medical decision making that requires particular attention as our society ages and technological advances provide new innovations for life-sustaining measures across all stages of the lifespan.

Consensus on a conversation aid for shared decision making with people with intellectual disabilities in the palliative phase

BACKGROUND

Little is known about how to involve people with intellectual disabilities in making decisions about treatment and care in their palliative phase. We aimed to reach a consensus about a shared decision-making (SDM) conversation aid for people with intellectual disabilities, relatives, and healthcare professionals.

METHODS

In a Delphi process, an expert panel of 11 people with intellectual disabilities, 14 relatives, and 65 healthcare professionals completed online questionnaires about the relevance and feasibility of a draft conversation aid.

RESULTS

In Round 1, components were rated as (very) relevant by 70-98% of participants (M = 87%). In Round 2, after amending the aid in response to feedback, relevance ratings were 67-97% (M = 90%) and feasibility ratings 66-86% (M = 77%). The final version consists of four themes: who are you; illness/end-of-life; making decisions; and evaluating the decision.

CONCLUSION

The consensus-based conversation aid is considered sufficiently relevant and feasible to be implemented in practice.

Effectiveness of shared decision-making intervention in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of shared decision-making (SDM) intervention among patients with lumbar degenerative diseases (LDDs) in terms of decision self-efficacy, control preferences, SDM process, decision satisfaction, and conflict.

METHODS

A total of 130 outpatients with LDDs recruited from orthopedic or rehabilitation clinics were randomly assigned to the SDM intervention (n = 67) or comparison (n = 63) groups. Patients in the intervention group received decision aids (DAs) with decision coaching and those in controlled group received standard educational materials from a health educator. The primary outcome was decision self-efficacy, and secondary outcomes were control preference, SDM process, conflict, and satisfaction.

RESULTS

The SDM intervention significantly improved decision self-efficacy (mean difference [MD] = 7.1, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7-12.5, partial η² = 0.05) and reduced conflict (MD = -7.0, 95% CI: -12.2 to -1.9, partial η² = 0.06), especially in patients without family involvement, compared with the health education group. However, no significant between-group differences were observed in other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

SDM intervention improved SDM self-efficacy and reduced conflict in patients with LDDs.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Clinicians can integrate DAs and decision coaching in SDM conversations. SDM intervention seems to engage patients in decision-making, especially those without family involvement.

Barriers and facilitators for shared decision making in older patients with multiple chronic conditions: a systematic review

Background

The aim of this study was to describe barriers and facilitators for shared decision making (SDM) as experienced by older patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs), informal caregivers and health professionals.

Methods

A structured literature search was conducted with 5 databases. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for eligibility and performed a quality assessment. The results from the included studies were summarized using a predefined taxonomy.

Results

Our search yielded 3838 articles. Twenty-eight studies, listing 149 perceived barriers and 67 perceived facilitators for SDM, were included. Due to poor health and cognitive and/or physical impairments, older patients with MCCs participate less in SDM. Poor interpersonal skills of health professionals are perceived as hampering SDM, as do organizational barriers, such as pressure for time and high turnover of patients. However, among older patients with MCCs, SDM could be facilitated when patients share information about personal values, priorities and preferences, as well as information about quality of life and functional status. Informal caregivers may facilitate SDM by assisting patients with decision support, although informal caregivers can also complicate the SDM process, for example, when they have different views on treatment or the patient’s capability to be involved. Coordination of care when multiple health professionals are involved is perceived as important.

Conclusions

Although poor health is perceived as a barrier to participate in SDM, the personal experience of living with MCCs is considered valuable input in SDM. An explicit invitation to participate in SDM is important to older adults. Health professionals need a supporting organizational context and good communication skills to devise an individualized approach for patient care.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02050-y.

The development of the evidence-based SDMMCC intervention to improve shared decision making in geriatric outpatients: the DICO study

Background

Shared decision making (SDM) contributes to personalized decisions that fit the personal preferences of patients when choosing a treatment for a condition. However, older adults frequently face multiple chronic conditions (MCC). Therefore, implementing SDM requires special features. The aim of this paper is to describe the development of an intervention to improve SDM in older adults with MCC.

Methods

Following the Medical Research Council framework for developing complex interventions, the SDM^MCC intervention was developed step-wise. Based on a literature review and empirical research in a co-creation process with end users, we developed training for geriatricians and a preparatory tool for older patients with MCC and informal caregivers. After assessing feasibility, the intervention was implemented in a pilot study (N = 108) in two outpatient geriatric clinics of an academic and a non-academic teaching hospital in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Results

Key elements of the training for geriatricians include developing skills to involve older adults with MCC and informal caregivers in SDM and following the six-step ‘Dynamic model for SDM with frail older patients’, as well as learning how to explore personal goals related to quality of life and how to form a partnership with the patient and the informal caregiver. Key elements of the preparatory tool for patients include an explicit invitation to participate in SDM, nomination that the patient’s own knowledge is valuable, invitation to form a partnership with the geriatrician, encouragement to share information about daily and social functioning and exploration of possible goals. Furthermore, the invitation of informal caregivers to share their concerns was also a key element.

Conclusions

Through a process of co-creation, both training for geriatricians and a preparatory tool for older adults and their informal caregivers were developed, tailored to the needs of the end users and based on the ‘Dynamic model of SDM with frail older patients’.

Shared decision making in older patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis: a systematic review

This review provides an overview of the status of shared decision making (SDM) in older patients regarding treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (SSAS). The databases Embase, Medline Ovid, Cinahl and Cochrane Dare were searched for relevant studies from January 2002 to May 2018 regarding perspectives of professionals, patients and caregivers; aspects of decision making; type of decision making; application of the six domains of SDM; barriers to and facilitators of SDM. The systematic search yielded 1842 articles, 15 studies were included. Experiences of professionals and informal caregivers with SDM were scarcely found. Patient refusal was a frequently reported result of decision making, but often no insight was given into the decision process. Most studies investigated the 'decision' and 'option' domains of SDM, yet no study took all six domains into account. Problem analysis, personalised treatment aims, use of decision aids and integrating patient goals in decisions lacked in all studies. Barriers to and facilitators of SDM were 'individualised formal and informal information support' and 'patients' opportunity to use their own knowledge about their health condition and preferences for SDM'. In conclusion, SDM is not yet common practice in the decision making process of older patients with SSAS. Moreover, the six domains of SDM are not often applied in this process. More knowledge is needed about the implementation of SDM in the context of SSAS treatment and how to involve patients, professionals and informal caregivers.

Realizing better doctor-patient dialogue about choices in palliative care and early phase clinical trial participation: towards an online value clarification tool (OnVaCT)

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced cancer for whom standard systemic treatment is no longer available may be offered participation in early phase clinical trials. In the decision making process, both medical-technical information and patient values and preferences are important. Since patients report decisional conflict after deciding on participation in these trials, improving the decision making process is essential. We aim to develop and evaluate an Online Value Clarification Tool (OnVaCT) to assist patients in clarifying their values around this end-of-life decision. This improved sharing of values is hypothesized to support medical oncologists in tailoring their information to individual patients' needs and, consequently, to support patients in taking decisions in line with their values and reduce decisional conflict.

METHODS

In the first part, patients' values and preferences and medical oncologists' views hereupon will be explored in interviews and focus groups to build a first prototype OnVaCT using digital communication (serious gaming). Next, we will test feasibility during think aloud sessions, to deliver a ready-to-implement OnVaCT. In the second part, the OnVaCT, with accompanied training module, will be evaluated in a pre-test (12-18 months before implementation) post-test (12-18 months after implementation) study in three major Dutch cancer centres. We will include 276 patients (> 18 years) with advanced cancer for whom standard systemic therapy is no longer available, and who are referred for participation in early phase clinical trials. The first consultation will be recorded to analyse patient-physician communication regarding the discussion of patients' values and the decision making process. Three weeks afterwards, decisional conflict will be measured.

DISCUSSION

This project aims to support the discussion of patient values when considering participation in early phase clinical trials. By including patients before their first appointment with the medical oncologist and recording that consultation, we are able to link decisional conflict to the decision making process, e.g. the communication during consultation. The study faces challenges such as timely including patients within the short period between referral and first consultation. Furthermore, with new treatments being developed rapidly, molecular stratification may affect the patient populations included in the pre-test and post-test periods.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Registry number: NTR7551 (prospective; July 17, 2018).