Shared decision making in cancer treatment: A Dutch national survey on patients' preferences and perceptions

Improving sustainability of a patient decision aid for systemic treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: A qualitative study

Objective

To improve sustainability of a patient decision aid for systemic treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer, we evaluated real-world experiences and identified ways to optimize decision aid content and future implementation.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews with patients and medical oncologists addressed two main subjects: user experience and decision aid content. Content analysis was applied. Fifteen experts discussed the results and devised improvements based on experience and literature review.

Results

Thirteen users were interviewed. They confirmed the relevance of the decision aid for shared decision making. Areas for improvement of content concerned; 1) outdated and missing information, 2) an imbalance in presentation of treatment benefits and harms, and 3) medical oncologists' expressed preference for a more center-specific or patient individualized decision aid, presenting a selection of the guideline recommended treatment options. Key points for improvement of implementation were better alignment within the care pathway, and clear instruction to users.

Conclusion

We identified relevant opportunities for improvement of an existing decision aid and developed an updated version and accompanying implementation strategy accordingly.

Innovation

This paper outlines an approach for continued decision aid and implementation strategy development which will add to sustainability. Implementation success of the improved decision aid is currently being studied in a multi-center mixed-methods implementation study.

Advocate-BREAST: advocates and patients' advice to enhance breast cancer care delivery, patient experience and patient centered research by 2025

PURPOSE

The aims of the Advocate-BREAST project are to study and improve the breast cancer (BC) patient experience through education and patient-centered research.

METHODS

In December 2021, an electronic REDCap survey was circulated to 6,918 BC survivors (stage 0-4) enrolled in the Mayo Clinic Breast Disease Registry. The questionnaire asked about satisfaction with BC care delivery, and education and support receive(d) regarding BC linked concerns. Patients also ranked Quality Improvement (QI) proposals.

RESULTS

The survey received 2,437 responses. 18% had Ductal Carcinoma in Situ, 81% had early breast cancer (EBC), i.e. stage 1-3, and 2% had metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Mean age was 64 (SD 11.8), and mean time since diagnosis was 93 months (SD 70.2). 69.3% of patients received all care at Mayo Clinic. The overall experience of care was good (> 90%). The main severe symptoms recalled in year 1 were alopecia, eyebrow/eyelash thinning, hot flashes, sexual dysfunction, and cognitive issues. The main concerns recalled were fear of BC recurrence/spread; loved ones coping; fear of dying, and emotional health. Patients were most dissatisfied with information regarding sexual dysfunction, eyebrow/eyelash thinning, peripheral neuropathy, and on side effects of immunotherapy/targeted therapies. Top ranking QI projects were: i) Lifetime access to concise educational resources; ii) Holistic support programs for MBC and iii) Wellness Programs for EBC and MBC.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with early and advanced BC desire psychological support, concise educational resources, and holistic care.

IMPLICATIONS

Focused research and QI initiatives in these areas will improve the BC patient experience.

The role of time in involving patients with cancer in treatment decision making: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Time is often perceived as a barrier to shared decision making in cancer care. It remains unclear how time functions as a barrier and how it could be most effectively utilized.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aimed to describe the role of time in patient involvement, and identify strategies to overcome time-related barriers.

METHODS

Seven databases were searched for any publications on patient involvement in cancer treatment decisions, focusing on how time is used to involve patients, the association between time and patient involvement, and/or strategies to overcome time-related barriers. Reviewers worked independently and in duplicate to select publications and extract data. One coder thematically analyzed data, a second coder checked these analyses.

RESULTS

The analysis of 26 eligible publications revealed four themes. Time was a resource 1) to process the diagnosis, 2) to obtain/process/consider information, 3) for patients and clinicians to spend together, and 4) for patient involvement in making decisions.

DISCUSSION

Time is a resource throughout the treatment decision-making process, and generic strategies have been proposed to overcome time constraints.

PRACTICE VALUE

Clinicians could co-create decision-making timelines with patients, spread decisions across several consultations, share written information with patients, and support healthcare redesigns that allocate the necessary time.

How Can We Improve Patient-Clinician Communication for Men Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer?

Background and objective

The ability of health care professionals to communicate with patients compassionately and effectively is crucial for shared decision-making, but little research has investigated patient-clinician communication. As part of PIONEER-an international Big Data Consortium led by the European Association of Urology to answer key questions for men with prostate cancer (PCa), funded through the IMI2 Joint Undertaking under grant agreement 777492- we investigated communication between men diagnosed with PCa and the health care professional(s) treating them across Europe.

Methods

We used the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Communication 26, which was shared via the PIONEER and patient organisations on March 11, 2022. We sought men who spoke French, Italian, Spanish, German, Dutch, or English who were diagnosed with PCa and were undergoing or had already received treatment for their PCa.

Results and limitations

A total of 372 men reported that they communicated with their clinician during either the diagnostic or the treatment period. Overall, the majority of participants reported positive experiences. However, important opportunities to enhance communication were identified, particularly with regard to correcting misunderstandings, understanding the patient's preferred approach to information presentation, addressing challenging questions, supporting the patient's comprehension of information, attending to the patient's emotional needs, and assessing what information had already been given to patients about their disease and treatment, and how much of it was understood.

Conclusions and clinical implications

These results help us to identify gaps and barriers to shared treatment decision making. This knowledge will help devise measures to improve patient-health care professional communication in the PCa setting.

Patient summary

As part of the PIONEER initiative, we investigated the communication between men diagnosed with prostate cancer and their health care professionals across Europe. A total of 372 men from six different countries participated in the study. Most participants reported positive experiences, but areas where communication could be improved were identified. These included addressing misunderstandings, tailoring the presentation of information to the patient's preferences, handling difficult questions, supporting emotional needs, and assessing the patient's understanding of their diagnosis and treatment.

Experiences and perspectives related to shared decision-making among outpatients with degenerative joint disease in Taiwan: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Various treatment options are available for degenerative joint disease (DJD). During clinical visits, patients and clinicians collaboratively make decisions regarding the optimal treatment for DJD; this is the essence of shared decision-making (SDM). Here, we collated and assessed the SDM-related experiences and perspectives of outpatients with DJD in Taiwan.

DESIGN

In-depth interviews and thematic analysis.

SETTING

Primary care clinics of a regional teaching hospital in Taiwan, October 2021-May 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

21 outpatients with at least three visits for DJD and who were aware of SDM.

RESULTS

Four main themes emerged in this study: first, equipping themselves with knowledge: outpatients obtained disease-related and treatment-related knowledge in various ways-seeking relevant information online, discussing with family and friends, learning from their own experiences or learning from professionals. Second, shared or not shared: physicians had different patterns for communicating with patients, particularly when demonstrating authority, performing mutual discussion, respecting patient preferences or responding perfunctorily. Third, seldom saying no to physician-prescribed treatment plans during clinical visits: most patients respected physicians' professionalism; however, some patients rejected physicians' recommendations indirectly, whereas some responded depending on their disease prognosis. Fourth, whose call?-participants decided to accept or reject a treatment plan independently or by discussing it with their families or by obeying their physicians' recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, patients with DJD sought reliable medical information from various sources before visiting doctors; however, when having a conversation with patients, physicians dominated the discussion on treatment options. The patient-physician interaction dynamics during the SDM process determined the final medical decision, which was in accordance with either patients' original autonomy or physicians' recommendations. To alleviate medical paternalism and physician dominance, patients should be empowered to engage in medical decision-making and share their opinions or concerns with their physicians. Family members should also be included in SDM.

The development of a decision aid for patients with operable oropharyngeal carcinoma in the Netherlands - A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this project is to create an interactive online patient decision aid (PDA) for oropharyngeal cancer (OPSCC) patients, eligible for transoral (robotic) surgery with an ultimate goal to assist both physicians and patients in making treatment choices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Following the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, a mixed-methods approach was employed. The study involved semi-structured in-depth interviews with patients and physicians, thinking-out-loud sessions, and study-specific questionnaires. Thematic coding and analysis were conducted on verbatim transcriptions of audio-recorded interviews.

RESULTS

The PDA drafts were evaluated by twenty OPSCC survivors and twenty multidisciplinary specialists. Significant revisions were made after phase 1 to enhance readability and reduce text, whilst incorporating videos and graphics. Following all phases, both patients and specialists rated the PDA as comprehensible, feasible, and a valuable addition to regular counseling.

CONCLUSION

This study showcases the development of a PDA for early stage oropharyngeal cancer patients considering surgery and radiotherapy options. The decision aid emphasizes the disparities in short- and long-term side effects between the two treatments. Patients and physicians found the decision aid to be understandable, user-friendly, and helpful for future patients. The PDA is available on https://beslissamen.nl/.

Factors Involved in Shared Decision-making Regarding Treatment Selection by Patients With Cancer

Background/Aim

Patients diagnosed with cancer are expected to choose one or more treatment modalities after receiving corresponding explanations of the options. When making these choices, patients consider the effects of treatment and aspects related to their quality of life. These concerns can cause confusion and conflict owing to the complicated information provided by medical caregivers. The objective of the study was to identify perceptions of cancer treatment in patients with cancer and the decision-making factors affecting their treatment choices.

Patients and Methods

In this observational (cross-sectional) study, an online questionnaire survey was administered to 194 Japanese cancer patients with treatment experience. Patient information, perceptions of explanations provided by healthcare professionals, treatment views, and reasons for treatment decisions were subjected to a simple tabulation. Content and factor analysis was conducted to determine important treatment selection elements.

Results

Regarding treatment perception, 60.3% of respondents (n=117) considered treatment a financial and family burden, 47.4% (n=92) had concerns about physical pain, and 40.2% (n=78) were worried about increased stress. Regarding decision-making quality, 95.9% determined their preferred treatment within one week, 49.0% reported difficulties in making their decisions, and 83.0% chose their treatment themselves. Major decisive factors were prolonging life, opinions of medical staff, and accepting treatment risks (68.0%, 68.6%, and 60.3% of patients, respectively). The main attitudes toward treatment were anxiety, expectations of benefit, and expectations of support and care.

Conclusion

SDM should enable patients to visualize the changes that their bodies will experience and include discussions on prognosis. Psychological care should be prioritized to alleviate anxiety and improve readiness for decision-making; attention should be paid to the extent and timing of information provision.

Solace for the Cankered Soul

The scourge of cancer mortally wounds the soul. From the time of diagnosis, the spiritual shock should be recognized, acknowledged, and addressed in concert with the personalized management strategy for the tumor. Optimal cancer care treats both body and soul. Psycho-oncology theory defines existential issues and spirituality in conceptually ambiguous terms but, in reality, such afflictions of the spirit cause great suffering in cancer patients. Patients often seek reassurance that their life has purpose and meaning, and the provision of emotional and soulful support from their oncologist is of inestimable importance to spiritual well-being. In addition to the time and resource constraints of daily clinical practice, recent challenges to the personal doctor-patient relationship include e-medicine and virtual clinical encounters, and the potential disruption to be wrought by new generation artificial intelligence. These obstacles are addressed with a view to the physician being able to continue to provide empathic compassionate care. The art of Kintsugi is invoked to offer a metaphor for restoration of the soul afflicted by cancer.

Assessment of patients' preferences for new anticancer drugs in China: a best-worst discrete choice experiment on three common cancer types

OBJECTIVES

Despite the advancement in anticancer drug therapies, cancer treatment decisions are often complex and preference-sensitive, making them well suited for studying shared decision-making (SDM). Our study aimed to assess preferences for new anticancer drugs among three common types of patients with cancer to inform SDM.

DESIGN

We identified five attributes of new anticancer drugs and used a Bayesian-efficient design to generate choice sets for a best-worst discrete choice experiment (BWDCE). The mixed logit regression model was applied to estimate patient-reported preferences for each attribute. The interaction model was used to investigate preference heterogeneity.

SETTING

The BWDCE was conducted in Jiangsu province and Hebei province in China.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 18 years or older, who had a definite diagnosis of lung cancer, breast cancer or colorectal cancer were recruited.

RESULTS

Data from 468 patients were available for analysis. On average, the most valued attribute was the improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (p<0.001). The low incidence of severe to life-threatening side effects, prolonged progression-free survival and the low incidence of mild to moderate side effects were also positive predictors of patients' preferences (p<0.001). Out-of-pocket cost was a negative predictor of their preferences (p<0.001). According to subgroup analysis by type of cancer, the improvement in HRQoL remained the most valuable attribute. However, the relative importance of other attributes varied by type of cancer. Whether patients were newly diagnosed or previously diagnosed cancer cases played a dominant role in the preference heterogeneity within each subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study can assist in the implementation of SDM by providing evidence on patients' preferences for new anticancer drugs. Patients should be informed of the multiattribute values of new drugs and encouraged to make decisions reflecting their values.

Patients' preferences in therapeutic decision-making in digestive oncology: a single centre cross-sectional observational study

Considering the preferences in Shared Decision Making (SDM) of patients with Digestive Cancer (DC) is crucial to ensure the quality of care. To date, there is limited information on preferences in SDM of patients with DC. The objectives of this study were to describe digestive cancer patients' preference for involvement in therapeutic decision-making and to identify variables associated with these preferences. An observational prospective study in a French university cancer center has been conducted. Patients completed two questionnaires to qualify and quantify their preference for involvement in therapeutic decision-making: the Control Preference Scale (CPS) and the Autonomy Preference Index (API), which is composed of the Decision Making (DM) score and the Information Seeking (IS) score. Associations between these scores and socio-demographic data, disease-related data, coping strategies (Brief-COPE), physical (QLQ-C30) and psychological (HADS) quality of life were tested. One-hundred fifteen patients returned the questionnaires. The majority of patients reported a passive (49.1%) or a collaborative (43.0%) CPS status. The mean DM score was 39.4 Variables associated with decision-making preferences were occupational status and time since diagnosis. The identification of variables associated with patients' preferences for involvement in decision-making can help make clinicians aware of patients' needs and wishes. However, it can only be determined by interviewing the patient individually.

Facilitating and Inhibiting Factors in Deciding to Start Retreatment in Survivors of Breast Cancer Recurrence

Background: Cancer recurrence is an important care challenge for breast cancer survivors. It is necessary to understand and identify the barriers and facilitators that affect the decision to start retreatment by those facing breast cancer recurrence compared to factors affecting their decision to start the initial treatment, which is different. Objectives: This study is part of a qualitative study with a grounded theory approach, which was conducted to explain the facilitating and inhibiting factors affecting the decision to start retreatment in survivors of breast cancer recurrence, using a qualitative content analysis method. Methods: This study was conducted based on the experiences of 16 patients with breast cancer recurrence and 2 oncologists to confirm the findings of the effective inhibiting and facilitating factors in patients’ decisions to start retreatment for breast cancer recurrence in one of the hospitals in Tehran, Iran. The samples were selected, using the purposeful sampling method trying to have maximum diversity. Data were collected through in-depth semi-structured telephone interviews from November 2020 to November 2021 and analyzed, using the conventional content analysis method following the Elo and Kyngas method, which includes 3 phases, including the preparation phase, the organizing phase, and the reporting phase. Credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability, and authenticity were used for determining the trustworthiness of data. Results: Both groups of inhibiting and facilitating factors were divided into 5 categories, including individual factors, social factors, family factors, illness characteristics, and treatment-related factors. Also, each category included sub-categories in two groups of inhibiting and facilitating factors affecting the decision to start treatment again. Conclusions: Based on the results of the present study, it is necessary to increase the awareness of patients with breast cancer by the treatment staff about the possibility of recurrence and to know the factors influencing their decision-making process to start retreatment. Nurses should play the role of advisors, educators, and supporters of the patients in this field.

Patient Preferences for Treatment Outcomes in Oncology with a Focus on the Older Patient-A Systematic Review

Simple Summary

In oncology, treatment outcomes can be competing, which means that one treatment could benefit one outcome, like survival, and negatively influence another, like independence. The choice of treatment therefore depends on the patient’s preference for outcomes, which needs to be assessed explicitly. Especially in older patients, patient preferences are important. Our systematic review summarizes all studies that assessed patient preferences for various treatment outcome categories. A total of 28 studies with 4374 patients were included, of which only six studies included mostly older patients. Although quality of life was only included in half of the studies, overall quality of life (79%) was most frequently prioritized as highest or second highest, followed by overall survival (67%), progression- and disease-free survival (56%), absence of severe or persistent treatment side effects (54%), treatment response (50%), and absence of transient short-term side effects (16%). In shared decision-making, these results can be used by healthcare professionals to better tailor the information provision and treatment recommendations to the individual patient.

Abstract

For physicians, it is important to know which treatment outcomes are prioritized overall by older patients with cancer, since this will help them to tailor the amount of information and treatment recommendations. Older patients might prioritize other outcomes than younger patients. Our objective is to summarize which outcomes matter most to older patients with cancer. A systematic review was conducted, in which we searched Embase and Medline on 22 December 2020. Studies were eligible if they reported some form of prioritization of outcome categories relative to each other in patients with all types of cancer and if they included at least three outcome categories. Subsequently, for each study, the highest or second-highest outcome category was identified and presented in relation to the number of studies that included that outcome category. An adapted Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. In total, 4374 patients were asked for their priorities in 28 studies that were included. Only six of these studies had a population with a median age above 70. Of all the studies, 79% identified quality of life as the highest or second-highest priority, followed by overall survival (67%), progression- and disease-free survival (56%), absence of severe or persistent treatment side effects (54%), and treatment response (50%). Absence of transient short-term side effects was prioritized in 16%. The studies were heterogeneous considering age, cancer type, and treatment settings. Overall, quality of life, overall survival, progression- and disease-free survival, and severe and persistent side effects of treatment are the outcomes that receive the highest priority on a group level when patients with cancer need to make trade-offs in oncologic treatment decisions.