1
|
van Maaren MC, van Hoeve JC, Korevaar JC, van Hezewijk M, Siemerink EJM, Zeillemaker AM, Klaassen-Dekker A, van Uden DJP, Volders JH, Drossaert CHC, Siesling S. The effectiveness of personalised surveillance and aftercare in breast cancer follow-up: a systematic review. Support Care Cancer 2024; 32:323. [PMID: 38695938 PMCID: PMC11065941 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-024-08530-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2023] [Accepted: 04/27/2024] [Indexed: 05/05/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Breast cancer follow-up (surveillance and aftercare) varies from one-size-fits-all to more personalised approaches. A systematic review was performed to get insight in existing evidence on (cost-)effectiveness of personalised follow-up. METHODS PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane were searched between 01-01-2010 and 10-10-2022 (review registered in PROSPERO:CRD42022375770). The inclusion population comprised nonmetastatic breast cancer patients ≥ 18 years, after completing curative treatment. All intervention-control studies studying personalised surveillance and/or aftercare designed for use during the entire follow-up period were included. All review processes including risk of bias assessment were performed by two reviewers. Characteristics of included studies were described. RESULTS Overall, 3708 publications were identified, 64 full-text publications were read and 16 were included for data extraction. One study evaluated personalised surveillance. Various personalised aftercare interventions and outcomes were studied. Most common elements included in personalised aftercare plans were treatment summaries (75%), follow-up guidelines (56%), lists of available supportive care resources (38%) and PROs (25%). Control conditions mostly comprised usual care. Four out of seven (57%) studies reported improvements in quality of life following personalisation. Six studies (38%) found no personalisation effect, for multiple outcomes assessed (e.g. distress, satisfaction). One (6.3%) study was judged as low, four (25%) as high risk of bias and 11 (68.8%) as with concerns. CONCLUSION The included studies varied in interventions, measurement instruments and outcomes, making it impossible to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of personalised follow-up. There is a need for a definition of both personalised surveillance and aftercare, whereafter outcomes can be measured according to uniform standards.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marissa C van Maaren
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE, Enschede, the Netherlands.
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| | - Jolanda C van Hoeve
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE, Enschede, the Netherlands
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Joke C Korevaar
- Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NIVEL), Utrecht, the Netherlands
- The Hague University of Applied Sciences, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Anneleen Klaassen-Dekker
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE, Enschede, the Netherlands
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - José H Volders
- Department of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Constance H C Drossaert
- Department of Psychology, Health & Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE, Enschede, the Netherlands
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ke Y, Zhou H, Chan RJ, Chan A. Decision aids for cancer survivors' engagement with survivorship care services after primary treatment: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv 2024; 18:288-317. [PMID: 35798994 PMCID: PMC10960885 DOI: 10.1007/s11764-022-01230-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2022] [Accepted: 06/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To elucidate existing decision aids (DAs) in supporting cancer survivors' decisions to engage in cancer survivorship care services after primary treatment. Secondary objectives are to assess the DA acceptability, impact of DAs, and implementation barriers. METHODS Databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL) were searched to collect publications from inception through September 2021. Studies describing the development or evaluation of DAs used for survivorship care services after primary cancer treatment were included. Article selection and critical appraisal were conducted independently by two authors. RESULTS We included 16 studies that described 13 DAs and addressed multiple survivorship care domains: prevention of recurrence/new cancers in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors and breast cancer gene mutation carriers, family building options, health insurance plans, health promotion (substance use behavior, cardiovascular disease risk reduction), advanced care planning, and post-treatment follow-up intensity. The electronic format was used to design most DAs for self-administration. The content presentation covered decisional context, options, and value clarification exercises. DAs were acceptable and associated with higher knowledge but presented inconclusive decisional outcomes. Implementation barriers included lack of design features for connectivity to care, low self-efficacy, and low perceived DA usefulness among healthcare professionals. Other survivor characteristics included age, literacy, preferred timing, and setting. CONCLUSIONS A diverse range of DAs exists in survivorship care services engagement with favorable knowledge outcomes. Future work should clarify the impact of DAs on decisional outcomes. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS DA characterization and suggestions for prospective developers could enhance support for cancer survivors encountering complex decisions throughout the survivorship continuum.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Ke
- Department of Pharmacy, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Hanzhang Zhou
- Department of Pharmacy, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Raymond Javan Chan
- Caring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA5042, Australia
- School of Nursing, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, Australia
- Princess Alexandra Hospital, Metro South Hospital and Health Services, Woolloongabba, QLD, Australia
| | - Alexandre Chan
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy Practice, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Søndergaard SR, Bechmann T, Maae E, Nielsen AWM, Nielsen MH, Møller M, Timm S, Lorenzen EL, Berry LL, Zachariae R, Offersen BV, Steffensen KD. Shared decision making with breast cancer patients - does it work? Results of the cluster-randomized, multicenter DBCG RT SDM trial. Radiother Oncol 2024; 193:110115. [PMID: 38316191 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/05/2023] [Revised: 01/23/2024] [Accepted: 01/28/2024] [Indexed: 02/07/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stine Rauff Søndergaard
- Department of Oncology, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark; Center for Shared Decision Making, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark; Institute of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark; OPEN, Open Patient data Explorative Network, Odense University Hospital, Region of Southern Denmark.
| | - Troels Bechmann
- Department of Oncology, Regional Hospital West Jutland, Herning, Denmark
| | - Else Maae
- Department of Oncology, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark
| | - Anders W Mølby Nielsen
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | | | - Mette Møller
- Department of Oncology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Signe Timm
- Department of Oncology, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark; Institute of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | | | | | - Robert Zachariae
- Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark; Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Birgitte Vrou Offersen
- Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Karina Dahl Steffensen
- Center for Shared Decision Making, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark; Institute of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ankersmid JW, Drossaert CHC, van Riet YEA, Strobbe LJA, Siesling S. Needs and preferences of breast cancer survivors regarding outcome-based shared decision-making about personalised post-treatment surveillance. J Cancer Surviv 2023; 17:1471-1479. [PMID: 35122224 PMCID: PMC10442247 DOI: 10.1007/s11764-022-01178-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2021] [Accepted: 01/24/2022] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE In this study, we explored how patients experience current information provision and decision-making about post-treatment surveillance after breast cancer. Furthermore, we assessed patients' perspectives regarding less intensive surveillance in case of a low risk of recurrence. METHODS We conducted semi-structured interviews with 22 women in the post-treatment surveillance trajectory in seven Dutch teaching hospitals. RESULTS Although the majority of participants indicated a desire for shared decision-making (SDM) about post-treatment surveillance, participants experienced no SDM. Information provision was often suboptimal and unstructured. Participants were open for using risk information in decision-making, but hesitant towards less intensive surveillance. Perceived advantages of less intensive surveillance were: less distressing moments, leaving the patient role behind, and lower burden. Disadvantages were: fewer moments for reassurance, fear of missing recurrences, and a higher threshold for aftercare for side effects. CONCLUSIONS SDM about post-treatment surveillance is desirable. Although women are hesitant about less intensive surveillance, they are open to the use of personalised risk assessment for recurrences in decision-making about surveillance. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS To facilitate SDM about post-treatment surveillance, the timing and content of information provision should be improved. Risk information should be provided in an accessible and understandable way. Moreover, fear of cancer recurrence and other personal considerations should be addressed in the process of SDM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jet W Ankersmid
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Center, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
- Santeon Hospital Group, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Constance H C Drossaert
- Department of Psychology, Health & Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | | | - Luc J A Strobbe
- Department of Surgery, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Center, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ankersmid JW, Drossaert CHC, Strobbe LJA, Battjes MS, Uden‐Kraan CF, Siesling S, Riet YEA, Bode‐Meulepas JM, Strobbe LJA, Dassen AE, Olieman AFT, Witjes HHG, Doeksen A, Contant CME. Health care professionals' perspectives on shared decision making supported by personalised‐risk‐for‐recurrences‐calculations regarding surveillance after breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2022. [PMCID: PMC9539946 DOI: 10.1111/ecc.13623] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
Objective Breast cancer patients for whom less intensive surveillance is sufficient can be identified based on the risk for locoregional recurrences (LRRs). This study explores health care professionals' (HCPs) perspectives on less intensive surveillance, preferences for shared decision‐making (SDM) about surveillance and perspectives on the use of patients' estimated personal risk for LRRs in decision‐making about surveillance. Methods We conducted semi‐structured interviews with 21 HCPs providing follow‐up care for breast cancer patients in seven Dutch teaching hospitals (Santeon hospitals). Results HCPs were predominantly positive about less intensive surveillance for women with a low risk for recurrences. They mentioned important prerequisites such as clearly defined surveillance schedules based on risk categories, information provision and communication support for patients and HCPs. Most HCPs supported SDM about surveillance and were positive about using patients' estimated personal risk for LRRs. HCPs specified prerequisites such as clear visualisation and explanation of risk information, attention for fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) and defined surveillance schedules for specific risk groups. Conclusion Mentioned prerequisites for less intensive surveillance need to be accounted for. Information needs and existing misconceptions need to be addressed. Outcome information regarding risks for LRRs and FCR can enrich the SDM process about surveillance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jet W. Ankersmid
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Center University of Twente Enschede
- Santeon Hospital Group Utrecht
| | | | - Luc J. A. Strobbe
- Department of Surgery Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital Nijmegen The Netherlands
| | - Melissa S. Battjes
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Center University of Twente Enschede
| | | | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Center University of Twente Enschede
- Department of Research and Development Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation Utrecht The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Mosha D, Kakolwa MA, Mahende MK, Masanja H, Abdulla S, Drakeley C, Gosling R, Wamoyi J. Safety monitoring experience of single-low dose primaquine co-administered with artemether-lumefantrine among providers and patients in routine healthcare practice: a qualitative study in Eastern Tanzania. Malar J 2021; 20:392. [PMID: 34627236 PMCID: PMC8501629 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-021-03921-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2021] [Accepted: 09/20/2021] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Primaquine is a gametocytocidal drug recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) in a single-low dose combined with artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) for the treatment and prevention of Plasmodium falciparum malaria transmission. Safety monitoring concerns and the lack of a universal validated and approved primaquine pharmacovigilance tool is a challenge for a national rollout in many countries. This study aimed to explore the acceptance, reliability and perceived effectiveness of the primaquine roll out monitoring pharmacovigilance tool (PROMPT). Methods This study was conducted in three dispensaries in the Coastal region of Eastern Tanzania. The study held six in-depth interviews with healthcare providers and six participatory focus group discussions with malaria patients (3) and parents/guardians of sick children (3). Participants were purposively sampled. Thematic analysis was conducted with the aid of NVivo qualitative analysis software. Results The respondents’ general acceptance and perceived effectiveness of the single-low dose primaquine and PROMPT was good. Screening procedure for treatment eligibility and explaining to patients about the possible adverse events was considered very useful for safety reasons. Crushing and dissolving of primaquine tablet to get the appropriate dose, particularly in children, was reported by all providers to be challenging. Transport costs and poor access to the health facility were the main reasons for a patient failing to return to the clinic for a scheduled follow-up visit. Treatment was perceived to be safe by both providers and patients and reported no case of a severe adverse event. Some providers were concerned with the haemoglobin drop observed on day 7. Conclusion Single-low dose primaquine was perceived to be safe and acceptable among providers and patients. PROMPT demonstrated to be a reliable and user-friendly tool among providers. Further validation of the tool by involving the National Malaria Control Programme is pivotal to addressing key challenges and facilitating primaquine adoption in the national policy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dominic Mosha
- Ifakara Health Institute, Plot 463, Kiko Ave, Mikocheni, P.O Box 78373, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
| | - Mwaka A Kakolwa
- Ifakara Health Institute, Plot 463, Kiko Ave, Mikocheni, P.O Box 78373, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
| | - Muhidin K Mahende
- Ifakara Health Institute, Plot 463, Kiko Ave, Mikocheni, P.O Box 78373, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
| | - Honorati Masanja
- Ifakara Health Institute, Plot 463, Kiko Ave, Mikocheni, P.O Box 78373, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
| | - Salim Abdulla
- Ifakara Health Institute, Plot 463, Kiko Ave, Mikocheni, P.O Box 78373, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
| | - Chris Drakeley
- Department of Immunology and Infection, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Roland Gosling
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.,Global Health Group, Malaria Elimination Initiative, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Joyce Wamoyi
- National Institute for Medical Research, Mwanza, Tanzania
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Witteman HO, Maki KG, Vaisson G, Finderup J, Lewis KB, Dahl Steffensen K, Beaudoin C, Comeau S, Volk RJ. Systematic Development of Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the IPDAS Collaboration. Med Decis Making 2021; 41:736-754. [PMID: 34148384 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x211014163] [Citation(s) in RCA: 61] [Impact Index Per Article: 20.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The 2013 update of the evidence informing the quality dimensions behind the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) offered a model process for developers of patient decision aids. OBJECTIVE To summarize and update the evidence used to inform the systematic development of patient decision aids from the IPDAS Collaboration. METHODS To provide further details about design and development methods, we summarized findings from a subgroup (n = 283 patient decision aid projects) in a recent systematic review of user involvement by Vaisson et al. Using a new measure of user-centeredness (UCD-11), we then rated the degree of user-centeredness reported in 66 articles describing patient decision aid development and citing the 2013 IPDAS update on systematic development. We contacted the 66 articles' authors to request their self-reports of UCD-11 items. RESULTS The 283 development processes varied substantially from minimal iteration cycles to more complex processes, with multiple iterations, needs assessments, and extensive involvement of end users. We summarized minimal, medium, and maximal processes from the data. Authors of 54 of 66 articles (82%) provided self-reported UCD-11 ratings. Self-reported scores were significantly higher than reviewer ratings (reviewers: mean [SD] = 6.45 [3.10]; authors: mean [SD] = 9.62 [1.16], P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Decision aid developers have embraced principles of user-centered design in the development of patient decision aids while also underreporting aspects of user involvement in publications about their tools. Templates may reduce the need for extensive development, and new approaches for rapid development of aids have been proposed when a more detailed approach is not feasible. We provide empirically derived benchmark processes and a reporting checklist to support developers in more fully describing their development processes.[Box: see text].
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Holly O Witteman
- Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Quebec City, Canada.,VITAM Research Centre, Quebec City, Canada.,CHU de Québec Research Centre, Quebec City, Canada
| | - Kristin G Maki
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Gratianne Vaisson
- Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Quebec City, Québec, Canada
| | - Jeanette Finderup
- Research Centre for Patient Involvement & Department of Renal Medicine, Aarhus University & Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Krystina B Lewis
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.,University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Karina Dahl Steffensen
- Center for Shared Decision Making/Department of Oncology, Lillebaelt University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark.,Institute of Regional Health Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, Vejle, Denmark
| | - Caroline Beaudoin
- Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Laval University, Quebec, Canada
| | - Sandrine Comeau
- Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Laval University, Quebec, Canada
| | - Robert J Volk
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Chan KH, Misseri R, Carroll A, Frankel R, Moore CM, Cockrum B, Wiehe SE. User-centered development of a hypospadias decision aid prototype. J Pediatr Urol 2020; 16:684.e1-684.e9. [PMID: 32863127 PMCID: PMC7686073 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2020.07.047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2020] [Revised: 07/23/2020] [Accepted: 07/31/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Many parents who choose hypospadias repair for their sons experience decisional conflict (DC) and decisional regret (DR). We previously found that parental decision-making about hypospadias surgery is a complex process characterized by cyclic information-seeking to alleviate anxiety and confusion. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to engage parents of hypospadias patients and pediatric providers in the co-design of a decision aid (DA) prototype to facilitate shared decision-making about hypospadias surgery and address DC and DR. METHODS From August 2018 to January 2019, we conducted three co-design workshops with parents of hypospadias patients, pediatric urology and general pediatric providers to discuss their recommendations for a DA prototype. Activities were audio recorded and professionally transcribed. Transcripts and worksheets were analyzed by six coders using qualitative analysis to identify key aspects of a hypospadias DA desired by stakeholders. We conducted a collaborative design and prototyping session to establish key features and requirements, created a content map visualizing this work, and then developed a DA prototype. RESULTS Parent participants included 6 mothers and 4 fathers: 8 Caucasian, 2 African-American; median age 31 years. Providers included pediatric urology (n = 7) and general pediatric providers (n = 10): median age 47.5 years, 83.3% Caucasian, 58.3% male, 58.3% MD's and 41.7% nurse practitioners. Participants created user-friendly, interactive DA prototypes with "24/7" availability that had three key functions: 1) provide accurate, customizable, educational content, 2) connect parents with each other, and 3) engage them in a decision-making activity. The prototype consisted of five modules (Extended Summary Figure). "Hypospadias Basics" includes epidemiology and a hypospadias severity scale. "Surgery Basics" includes goals, illustrated steps, and pros/cons of surgery. "Testimonials" includes videos of parents and adolescents discussing their experiences. "Help me Decide" includes a decisional conflict scale and a decision-making activity (i.e. values clarification method). "Frequently Asked Questions" covers general hypospadias information, perioperative expectations and a review of postoperative care. DISCUSSION To our knowledge, this is the first DA prototype developed for a pediatric urology condition using a human-centered design approach to engage many key stakeholders in the development process. One limitation of this study is the small population sampled, which limits generalizability and means that our findings may not reflect the views of all parents or pediatric providers involved in hypospadias decision-making. CONCLUSIONS We created a parent-centered hypospadias DA prototype that provides decision support in an online, interactive format. Future directions include further testing with usability experts, providers and parents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katherine H Chan
- Department of Urology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Center for Pediatric and Adolescent Comparative Effectiveness Research, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
| | - Rosalia Misseri
- Department of Urology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
| | - Aaron Carroll
- Center for Pediatric and Adolescent Comparative Effectiveness Research, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
| | - Richard Frankel
- Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Cleveland Clinic Learner Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA.
| | - Courtney M Moore
- Research Jam, Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
| | - Brandon Cockrum
- Research Jam, Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
| | - Sarah E Wiehe
- Children's Health Services Research, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA; Research Jam, Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
de Ligt KM, van Egdom LS, Koppert LB, Siesling S, van Til JA. Opportunities for personalised follow‐up care among patients with breast cancer: A scoping review to identify preference‐sensitive decisions. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2019; 28:e13092. [PMID: 31074162 PMCID: PMC9285605 DOI: 10.1111/ecc.13092] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2019] [Revised: 03/21/2019] [Accepted: 04/20/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Introduction Current follow‐up arrangements for breast cancer do not optimally meet the needs of individual patients. We therefore reviewed the evidence on preferences and patient involvement in decisions about breast cancer follow‐up to explore the potential for personalised care. Methods Studies published between 2008 and 2017 were extracted from MEDLINE, PsycINFO and EMBASE. We then identified decision categories related to content and form of follow‐up. Criteria for preference sensitiveness and patient involvement were compiled and applied to determine the extent to which decisions were sensitive to patient preferences and patients were involved. Results Forty‐one studies were included in the full‐text analysis. Four decision categories were identified: “surveillance for recurrent/secondary breast cancer; consultations for physical and psychosocial effects; recurrence‐risk reduction by anti‐hormonal treatment; and improving quality of life after breast cancer.” There was little evidence that physicians treated decisions about anti‐hormonal treatment, menopausal symptoms, and follow‐up consultations as sensitive to patient preferences. Decisions about breast reconstruction were considered as very sensitive to patient preferences, and patients were usually involved. Conclusion Patients are currently not involved in all decisions that affect them during follow‐up, indicating a need for improvements. Personalised follow‐up care could improve resource allocation and the value of care for patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly M. de Ligt
- Department of Research Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL) Utrecht The Netherlands
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre University of Twente Enschede The Netherlands
| | - Laurentine S.E. van Egdom
- Department of Surgical Oncology Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Centre Rotterdam Rotterdam The Netherlands
| | - Linetta B. Koppert
- Department of Surgical Oncology Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, University Medical Centre Rotterdam Rotterdam The Netherlands
| | - Sabine Siesling
- Department of Research Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL) Utrecht The Netherlands
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre University of Twente Enschede The Netherlands
| | - Janine A. van Til
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre University of Twente Enschede The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Klaassen L, Dirksen C, Boersma L, Hoving C. Developing an aftercare decision aid; assessing health professionals' and patients' preferences. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2017; 27:e12730. [PMID: 28727259 PMCID: PMC5900871 DOI: 10.1111/ecc.12730] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/22/2017] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
Personalising aftercare for curatively treated breast cancer patients is expected to improve patient satisfaction with care. A patient decision aid can support women in making decisions about their aftercare trajectory, but is currently not available. The aim of this study was to assess the needs of patients and health professionals with regard to an aftercare decision aid to systematically develop such a decision aid. Focus groups with patients and individual interviews with health professionals were digitally recorded and coded using the Framework analysis. Although most patients felt few aftercare options were available to them, health professionals reported to provide various options on the patients' request. Patients reported difficulty in expressing their need for options to their health professional. Although most patients were unfamiliar with decision aids, the majority preferred a paper‐based patient decision aid, while most health professionals preferred an online tool. The practical implications for the intended patient decision aid are: that a digital tool with paper‐based element should be developed, the patient decision aid should facilitate both rational and intuitive processes and should provide insight in patients' preferences concerning aftercare to discuss these explicitly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linda Klaassen
- Department of Health Promotion/CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Carmen Dirksen
- Department of KEMTA/CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Liesbeth Boersma
- Department of Radiation oncology (MAASTRO Clinic)/GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Ciska Hoving
- Department of Health Promotion/CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|