A decision aid to support informed choices about bowel cancer screening among adults with low education: randomised controlled trial

A qualitative study on the effect of a decision aid on knowledge of cataract surgery in patients in developing countries

BACKGROUND

Despite cataract surgery being a safe procedure with a low incidence of perioperative complications rates, poor knowledge, concerns about the effectiveness of treatment and cost-benefit analysis of the procedure significantly hinder cataract surgery uptake rates in Africa. This study describes the effect of a decision aid on knowledge and decision conflict on cataract patients in Africa.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

120 patients with cataracts reporting to a tertiary hospital in Ghana were randomly assigned to receive a decision aid containing information on the possible outcomes of cataract surgery or a control booklet containing general knowledge about cataracts without information about cataract surgery. The primary outcome measured was the effect of the decision aid on their knowledge of cataract surgery. A score greater than 6/12 (50%) was deemed adequate knowledge. The secondary outcome was the decision conflict experienced by the participants assessed using the Decision Conflict Scale.

RESULTS

Compared to the control group, the participants in the intervention group scored higher marks across all sections of the questionnaire (2.92 vs 2.7, p = 0.042 in section "Background"; 2.62 vs 1.77, p < 0.001 in section "Materials"; 1.87 vs 1.55, p = 0.03 in section "Results"). The average total score was higher in the intervention group than in the control (36.7% difference; p < 0.001). Participants in the intervention group also demonstrated lower decision conflict scores than those in the control group (13.00 vs 37.17; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The decision aid increased knowledge of cataract surgery and reduced decision conflict among patients in a developing country.

Randomized Trial of Information for Older Women About Cessation of Breast Cancer Screening Invitations

BACKGROUND

Older women receive no information about why Australia's breast screening program (BreastScreen) invitations cease after 74 years. We tested how providing older women with the rationale for breast screening cessation impacted informed choice (adequate knowledge; screening attitudes aligned with intention).

METHODS

In a three-arm online randomized trial, eligible participants were females aged 70-74 years who had recently participated in breast screening (within 5 years), without personal breast cancer history, recruited through Qualtrics. Participants read a hypothetical scenario in which they received a BreastScreen letter reporting no abnormalities on their mammogram. They were randomized to receive the letter: (1) without any rationale for screening cessation (control); (2) with screening cessation rationale in printed-text form (e.g., downsides of screening outweigh the benefits after age 74); or (3) with screening cessation rationale presented in an animation video form. The primary outcome was informed choice about continuing/stopping breast screening beyond 74 years.

RESULTS

A total of 376 participant responses were analyzed. Compared to controls (n = 122), intervention arm participants (text [n = 132] or animation [n = 122]) were more likely to make an informed choice (control 18.0%; text 32.6%, p = .010; animation 40.5%, p < .001). Intervention arm participants had more adequate knowledge (control 23.8%; text 59.8%, p < .001; animation 68.9%, p < .001), lower screening intentions (control 17.2%; text 36.4%, p < .001; animation 49.2%, p < .001), and fewer positive screening attitudes regarding screening for themselves in the animation arm, but not in the text arm (control 65.6%; text 51.5%, p = .023; animation 40.2%, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Providing information to older women about the rationale for breast cancer screening cessation increased informed decision-making in a hypothetical scenario. This study is an important first step in improving messaging provided by national cancer screening providers direct to older adults. Further research is needed to assess the impact of different elements of the intervention and the impact of providing this information in clinical practice, with more diverse samples.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ANZCTRN12623000033640.

The validity of instruments to measure knowledge in population-based cancer screening targeting individuals at average risk - A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Relevant knowledge is essential for informed choices about (non)participation in population-based cancer screening. Many instruments have been proposed to assess residents' knowledge about cancer screening programmes but their measurement properties are unknown. This systematic review aims to identify and critically evaluate the measurement properties of instruments to measure knowledge about cancer screening in individuals eligible for population-based screening.

METHODS

A literature search was undertaken in PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science in August 2023. The review included any study reporting one or more measurement properties of the questionnaire or sub-scale used measuring knowledge of cancer screening including breast, colorectal and/or cervical cancer screening. Studies including males aged 45 or older and females aged 20 or older were included. Two independent reviewers screened the articles and assessed the included articles using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN).

RESULTS

We included 24 instruments, which varied in number and characteristics of items. All instruments were assessed as having an inadequate instrument development. The results of structural validity, internal consistency, criterion validity and reliability were assessed as indeterminate, while construct validity and responsiveness were assessed as sufficient.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review identified no instruments to measure knowledge about cancer screening where the measurement properties were sufficiently evaluated. There is a lack of focus on content validity and structural validity, and further validation of the instruments is needed. The results indicate a lack of shared understanding or agreement of what constitutes relevant knowledge about cancer screening.

Women's Preferences for Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy for Treatment of Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment

PURPOSE

The primary treatment recommended for early-stage breast cancer is breast conserving surgery followed by external beam radiation therapy of the whole breast. Previously, radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer was given using more fractions over longer durations. Guidelines support treatments with fewer fractions over a shorter time (hypofractionated radiation therapy). This study aimed to understand women's preferences for different features of treatments for early-stage breast cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A discrete choice experiment with 12 choice tasks was conducted, describing the treatments by extent of surgery, duration of radiation treatment, need to relocate for treatment, local side effects, changes in breast appearance, costs, and difficulty with daily activities during and after treatment. Participants were women with breast cancer and from the general population. Mixed logit analyses were conducted and trade-offs between attributes estimated.

RESULTS

Four hundred twenty respondents completed the discrete choice experiment. The relative importance of attributes varied by respondent characteristics; the most influential attribute for younger women was type of surgery (breast conserving surgery). Type of surgery did not influence older women's preferences. Shorter treatment duration, avoiding relocation, fewer local side effects, and less difficulty with daily activities all positively influenced treatment preference. Younger women were willing to accept 32 to 40 days of radiation treatment before a treatment that included mastectomy was potentially acceptable.

CONCLUSIONS

Attributes of treatment such as duration, need for relocation, side effects, and effects on normal daily activities during and after treatment significantly influenced women's preference for treatment, including surgery. Our findings have the potential for real impact for patients and services including supporting one-on-one clinical discussions, supporting program and patient resource development, and informing service funding, organization, and delivery.

Usability of an Automated System for Real-Time Monitoring of Shared Decision-Making for Surgery: Mixed Methods Evaluation

BACKGROUND

Improving shared decision-making (SDM) for patients has become a health policy priority in many countries. Achieving high-quality SDM is particularly important for approximately 313 million surgical treatment decisions patients make globally every year. Large-scale monitoring of surgical patients' experience of SDM in real time is needed to identify the failings of SDM before surgery is performed. We developed a novel approach to automating real-time data collection using an electronic measurement system to address this. Examining usability will facilitate its optimization and wider implementation to inform interventions aimed at improving SDM.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the usability of an electronic real-time measurement system to monitor surgical patients' experience of SDM. We aimed to evaluate the metrics and indicators relevant to system effectiveness, system efficiency, and user satisfaction.

METHODS

We performed a mixed methods usability evaluation using multiple participant cohorts. The measurement system was implemented in a large UK hospital to measure patients' experience of SDM electronically before surgery using 2 validated measures (CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9). Quantitative data (collected between April 1 and December 31, 2021) provided measurement system metrics to assess system effectiveness and efficiency. We included adult patients booked for urgent and elective surgery across 7 specialties and excluded patients without the capacity to consent for medical procedures, those without access to an internet-enabled device, and those undergoing emergency or endoscopic procedures. Additional groups of service users (group 1: public members who had not engaged with the system; group 2: a subset of patients who completed the measurement system) completed user-testing sessions and semistructured interviews to assess system effectiveness and user satisfaction. We conducted quantitative data analysis using descriptive statistics and calculated the task completion rate and survey response rate (system effectiveness) as well as the task completion time, task efficiency, and relative efficiency (system efficiency). Qualitative thematic analysis identified indicators of and barriers to good usability (user satisfaction).

RESULTS

A total of 2254 completed surveys were returned to the measurement system. A total of 25 service users (group 1: n=9; group 2: n=16) participated in user-testing sessions and interviews. The task completion rate was high (169/171, 98.8%) and the survey response rate was good (2254/5794, 38.9%). The median task completion time was 3 (IQR 2-13) minutes, suggesting good system efficiency and effectiveness. The qualitative findings emphasized good user satisfaction. The identified themes suggested that the measurement system is acceptable, easy to use, and easy to access. Service users identified potential barriers and solutions to acceptability and ease of access.

CONCLUSIONS

A mixed methods evaluation of an electronic measurement system for automated, real-time monitoring of patients' experience of SDM showed that usability among patients was high. Future pilot work will optimize the system for wider implementation to ultimately inform intervention development to improve SDM.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079155.

Interventions to improve oncofertility knowledge and decision-making in patients with low health literacy: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of interventions that improve knowledge, health and decision-related outcomes in cancer, fertility or the intersection of both among low health literacy (LHL) patients.

METHODS

Articles published from 2000 to March 2022 in English were identified through searching MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and Embase databases on 29/03/2022. Studies were independently screened against eligibility criteria and appraised for quality. A narrative synthesis of data was presented.

RESULTS

Of 235 citations, 11 studies (2585 participants) investigating three categories were included: decision-support tools (n = 8), mobile health applications (n = 2) and communication tools (n = 1). No eligible study was identified for fertility or oncofertility. All interventions integrated multimedia or interactivity to supplement plain-language text. Decision aids and mobile health applications improved knowledge, reduced decisional conflict and increased clarity around cancer-related choices. Overall, findings favoured the use of online interventions tailored for LHL patients.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of data on LHL interventions in fertility and oncofertility. In cancer, LHL interventions improved knowledge and decision-making outcomes. The ideal intervention remains inconclusive.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Lack of engagement with LHL needs in oncofertility and fertility settings have implications for informed treatment decision-making. In cancer, further research is required to ascertain most effective intervention format.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

BACKGROUND

Patient decision aids are interventions designed to support people making health decisions. At a minimum, patient decision aids make the decision explicit, provide evidence-based information about the options and associated benefits/harms, and help clarify personal values for features of options. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2003 and last updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of patient decision aids in adults considering treatment or screening decisions using an integrated knowledge translation approach.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted the updated search for the period of 2015 (last search date) to March 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EBSCO, and grey literature. The cumulative search covers database origins to March 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published randomized controlled trials comparing patient decision aids to usual care. Usual care was defined as general information, risk assessment, clinical practice guideline summaries for health consumers, placebo intervention (e.g. information on another topic), or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted intervention and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made (informed values-based choice congruence) and the decision-making process, such as knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, feeling informed, clear values, participation in decision-making, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were choice, confidence in decision-making, adherence to the chosen option, preference-linked health outcomes, and impact on the healthcare system (e.g. consultation length). We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of 105 studies that were included in the previous review version compared to those published since that update (n = 104 studies). We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This update added 104 new studies for a total of 209 studies involving 107,698 participants. The patient decision aids focused on 71 different decisions. The most common decisions were about cardiovascular treatments (n = 22 studies), cancer screening (n = 17 studies colorectal, 15 prostate, 12 breast), cancer treatments (e.g. 15 breast, 11 prostate), mental health treatments (n = 10 studies), and joint replacement surgery (n = 9 studies). When assessing risk of bias in the included studies, we rated two items as mostly unclear (selective reporting: 100 studies; blinding of participants/personnel: 161 studies), due to inadequate reporting. Of the 209 included studies, 34 had at least one item rated as high risk of bias. There was moderate-certainty evidence that patient decision aids probably increase the congruence between informed values and care choices compared to usual care (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.13; 21 studies, 9377 participants). Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, there was high-certainty evidence that patient decision aids result in improved participants' knowledge (MD 11.90/100, 95% CI 10.60 to 13.19; 107 studies, 25,492 participants), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.34; 25 studies, 7796 participants), and decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -10.02, 95% CI -12.31 to -7.74; 58 studies, 12,104 participants), indecision about personal values (MD -7.86, 95% CI -9.69 to -6.02; 55 studies, 11,880 participants), and proportion of people who were passive in decision-making (clinician-controlled) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.88; 21 studies, 4348 participants). For adverse outcomes, there was high-certainty evidence that there was no difference in decision regret between the patient decision aid and usual care groups (MD -1.23, 95% CI -3.05 to 0.59; 22 studies, 3707 participants). Of note, there was no difference in the length of consultation when patient decision aids were used in preparation for the consultation (MD -2.97 minutes, 95% CI -7.84 to 1.90; 5 studies, 420 participants). When patient decision aids were used during the consultation with the clinician, the length of consultation was 1.5 minutes longer (MD 1.50 minutes, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.20; 8 studies, 2702 participants). We found the same direction of effect when we compared results for patient decision aid studies reported in the previous update compared to studies conducted since 2015.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care, across a wide variety of decisions, patient decision aids probably helped more adults reach informed values-congruent choices. They led to large increases in knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, and an active role in decision-making. Our updated review also found that patient decision aids increased patients' feeling informed and clear about their personal values. There was no difference in decision regret between people using decision aids versus those receiving usual care. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of patient decision aids on adherence and downstream effects on cost and resource use.

Parental Attitudes About Lumbar Puncture in Children With Suspected Central Nervous System Infection

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate parents' attitudes toward lumbar puncture (LP) for their children with suspected central nervous system infection to determine the reasons for rejection and related factors.

METHODS

The survey was provided to parents of children (1 month to 18 years old) for whom LP was recommended because of a concern for central nervous system infection. Sociodemographic characteristics and other related factors of parents who did and did not approve of LP were compared statistically. The reasons for the disapproval of parents who refused LP were revealed.

RESULTS

A total of 100 parents were included in the study. Eighty-two percent of the participating parents were mothers, and the median age of the mothers was 31 years (min: 17 years; max: 70 years). The median age of the fathers was 37 years (min: 22 years; max: 60 years). Among the parents, 34% did not give consent for LP. The most common reason for the participants to refuse LP was fear of paralysis of their children due to the procedure (82.3%). There was a statistical difference between the approval of the LP procedure and the person who informed the parents about the LP procedure and read the informed consent form ( P = 0.004 and P = 0.038, respectively).As a result of the binary logistic regression analysis, it was seen that the rate of acceptance of the LP procedure by the parents informed by the specialist doctors was 7.1-fold ( P = 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-37.6) higher than the parents informed by the resident physicians.

CONCLUSION

The informed consent process mainly influenced parents' attitudes toward LP. To increase the acceptance rates of LP, we should standardize the informed consent process so that it is not affected by factors such as seniority of the physician.

Testing Theory-Based Messages to Encourage Women at Average Risk for Breast Cancer to Consider Biennial Mammography Screening

BACKGROUND

The US Preventive Services Task Force does not recommend routine annual mammography screening for women aged 40-49 at average risk. Little research has been done to develop theory-based communication interventions to facilitate informed decision-making about reducing potentially low-value mammography screening.

PURPOSE

Evaluate the effects of theory-based persuasive messages on women's willingness to consider delaying screening mammography until age 50 or have mammograms biennially.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled communication experiment online with a population-based sample of U.S. women aged 40-49 (N = 383) who screened to be at average risk for breast cancer. Women were randomly assigned to the following messaging summaries: annual mammography risks in 40s (Arm 1, n = 124), mammography risks plus family history-based genetic risk (Arm 2, n = 120), and mammography risks, genetic risk, and behavioral alternatives (Arm 3, n = 139). Willingness to delay screening or reduce screening frequency was assessed post-experiment by a set of 5-point Likert scale items.

RESULTS

Women in Arm 3 reported significantly greater willingness to delay screening mammography until age 50 (mean = 0.23, SD = 1.26) compared with those in Arm 1 (mean = -0.17, SD = 1.20; p = .04). There were no significant arm differences in willingness to reduce screening frequency. Exposure to the communication messages significantly shifted women's breast cancer-related risk perceptions without increasing unwarranted cancer worry across all three arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing women with screening information and options may help initiate challenging discussions with providers about potentially low-value screening.

Mixed-Method Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Shared Decision-Making Tools for Cancer Screening

This review aimed to synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of shared decision-making (SDM) tools for cancer screening and explored the preferences of vulnerable people and clinicians regarding the specific characteristics of the SDM tools. A mixed-method convergent segregated approach was employed, which involved an independent synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data. Articles were systematically selected and screened, resulting in the inclusion and critical appraisal of 55 studies. Results from the meta-analysis revealed that SDM tools were more effective for improving knowledge, reducing decisional conflict, and increasing screening intentions among vulnerable populations compared to non-vulnerable populations. Subgroup analyses showed minimal heterogeneity for decisional conflict outcomes measured over a six-month period. Insights from the qualitative findings revealed the complexities of clinicians' and vulnerable populations' preferences for an SDM tool in cancer screening. Vulnerable populations highly preferred SDM tools with relevant information, culturally tailored content, and appropriate communication strategies. Clinicians, on the other hand, highly preferred tools that can be easily integrated into their medical systems for efficient use and can effectively guide their practice for cancer screening while considering patients' values. Considering the complexities of patients' and clinicians' preferences in SDM tool characteristics, fostering collaboration between patients and clinicians during the creation of an SDM tool for cancer screening is essential. This collaboration may ensure effective communication about the specific tool characteristics that best support the needs and preferences of both parties.

The effect of numeric information about the likelihood of receiving a false negative or false positive result on people's attitudes towards colorectal cancer screening using faecal immunochemical testing (FIT)

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of numeric risk information about false negative (FN) and false positive (FP) rates in fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) on attitudes towards screening.

METHODS

102 people aged 45-55, living in the UK, read 6 hypothetical vignettes presented online about the use of FIT kits to detect colorectal cancer, in which information about FN and FP rates was systematically varied.

RESULTS

Numeric FN risk information reduced people's interest in screening, perception of screening effectiveness and lowered trust in screening compared to verbal FN information. Verbal FN information reduced perceptions of screening effectiveness and trust compared to no FN information. People with high subjective numeracy reported lower trust in screening following the provision of numeric FN information but numeracy did not moderate any other associations. FP information did not affect attitudes towards FIT testing.

CONCLUSION

Numeric FN risk information decreased people's perceptions of screening effectiveness and trust in the results of screening. While it influenced people's interest in screening, the effect was small.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Numeric FN information has a small effect on interest in screening and could promote informed decision making without affecting screening uptake.

The effectiveness and design of informed choice tools for people with severe mental illness: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

People with severe mental illness (SMI) report difficulty in making health-related decisions. Informed choice tools are designed to guide individuals through a decision-making process.

AIMS

To determine the effectiveness of these tools for people with SMI and to identify what methods and processes may contribute to effectiveness.

METHOD

A systematic electronic search was conducted for studies published between 1996 and January 2018. The search was updated in March 2020. Studies of any design reporting the development or evaluation of any informed choice tool for people with SMI were considered. A structured, narrative synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

Ten articles describing four tools were identified. Tools were designed to assist with decision-making around bipolar treatment, smoking cessation and disclosure of mental illness in employment situations. Positive changes in decisional conflict, stage of change, knowledge and self-efficacy were reported for two tools, though insufficient data exists for definitive conclusions of effectiveness. Feedback from service users and attention to readability appeared key.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base for informed choice tools for people with SMI is limited. Such tools should be developed in stages and include the views of people with SMI at each phase; readability should be considered, and a theoretical framework should be used to facilitate process evaluation.

Applying shared decision-making to screening for trauma and adversity in youth

Youth who have experienced adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) or trauma are at risk for negative outcomes that may be lessened by adversity screening and prevention efforts. However, experts and consumers do not universally embrace adversity screening efforts. Despite significant support for widespread adversity screening, and many guidelines on how to conduct such screening, successful implementation has lagged behind enthusiasm. This paper outlines the challenges of adversity screening and then proposes applying the shared decision-making (SDM) model to improve adversity screening by increasing youths' 1) engagement in adversity screening if doing so is appropriate for them, and 2) disclosure of honest information during screens. Using an SDM approach honors youth preferences and perspectives, which simultaneously accomplishes a third overarching goal: aligning adversity screening with the principles of trauma-informed care.

The impact of a patient decision aid on intention to undergo surgery for subacromial pain syndrome: An online randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of a patient decision aid for people considering shoulder surgery.

METHODS

Participants with shoulder pain considering shoulder surgery (n = 425) were recruited online and randomised to (i) a decision aid outlining the benefits and harms of shoulder surgery and non-surgical options (then randomised to a side-by-side vs. top-and-bottom display of options); and (ii) general information about shoulder pain from the NHS. Outcomes included treatment intention (primary), knowledge, attitudes, informed choice, and decisional conflict. Linear and logistic regression models were used to evaluate between-groups differences in outcomes.

RESULTS

409 participants (96%) had post-intervention data. Mean age was 41.3 years, 44.2% were female. There was no between-group difference in post-intervention treatment intention (MD -0.2, 95% CI: -3.3 to 2.8) and likelihood of intending to have shoulder surgery (OR 0.7, 95% CI: 0.3-1.5). The decision aid slightly improved knowledge (MD 4.4, 95% CI: 0.2-8.6), but not any other secondary outcomes. The display of options did not influence any outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In this online trial, a co-designed patient decision aid had no effect on treatment intention, attitudes, informed choice, and decisional conflict, but a small effect on improving knowledge.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Research is needed to understand reasons for the lack of anticipated effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621000992808).

Broad Medical Uncertainty and the ethical obligation for openness

This paper argues that there exists a collective epistemic state of 'Broad Medical Uncertainty' (BMU) regarding the effectiveness of many medical interventions. We outline the features of BMU, and describe some of the main contributing factors. These include flaws in medical research methodologies, bias in publication practices, financial and other conflicts of interest, and features of how evidence is translated into practice. These result in a significant degree of uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of many medical treatments and unduly optimistic beliefs about the benefit/harm profiles of such treatments. We argue for an ethical presumption in favour of openness regarding BMU as part of a 'Corrective Response'. We then consider some objections to this position (the 'Anti-Corrective Response'), including concerns that public honesty about flaws in medical research could undermine trust in healthcare institutions. We suggest that, as it stands, the Anti-Corrective Response is unconvincing.

Towards a more patient-centered clinical trial process: A systematic review of interventions incorporating health literacy best practices

BACKGROUND

A 2019 public workshop convened by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) Roundtable on Health Literacy identified a need to develop evidence-based guidance for best practices for health literacy and patient activation in clinical trials.

PURPOSE

To identify studies of health literacy interventions within medical care or clinical trial settings that were associated with improved measures of health literacy or patient activation, to help inform best practices in the clinical trial process.

DATA SOURCES

Literature searches were conducted in PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, SCOPUS, Cochrane, and Web of Science from January 2009 to June 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Of 3592 records screened, 22 records investigating 27 unique health literacy interventions in randomized controlled studies were included for qualitative synthesis.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data screening and abstraction were performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Types of health literacy interventions were multimedia or technology-based (11 studies), simplification of written material (six studies) and in-person sessions (five studies). These interventions were applied at various stages in the healthcare and clinical trial process. All studies used unique outcome measures, including patient comprehension, quality of informed consent, and patient activation and engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of our study suggest that best practice guidelines recommend health literacy interventions during the clinical trial process, presentation of information in multiple forms, involvement of patients in information optimization, and improved standardization in health literacy outcome measures.

Making decisions on your own: Self-administered decision aids about colorectal cancer screening - A systematic review and meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE

To provide a systematic review of self-administered decision aids (DAs) for citizens invited to participate in colorectal cancer screening synthesizing the effectiveness of self-administered DAs on informed choice or the components hereof; knowledge, attitudes, and participation.

METHODS

The literature search was undertaken in PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase and Scopus and last updated 19 March 2021. Results were presented by narrative synthesis, meta-analyses and vote counting based on direction of effect.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies of fair methodological quality were included. One study reported on informed choice and 13 studies reported on the components. Self-administered DAs increased participation and knowledge whereas it was inconclusive with regard to attitudes towards screening. The studies were very heterogeneous with different comparators, outcomes and means of measurement.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review showed a potential for self-administered DAs to support informed choice in colorectal cancer screening, especially by increasing knowledge.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

It seems reasonable to consider informed choice to be one of the main outcomes of self-administered DAs. Yet there is a need for consensus on how to measure informed choice in cancer screening, especially a validated measurement of knowledge defining what constitutes 'adequate knowledge'.

The development of a decision aid to support Hodgkin lymphoma survivors considering lung cancer screening

BACKGROUND

Decisions aids (DA) can support patients to make informed decisions about screening tests. This study describes the development and initial evaluation of a lung cancer screening (LCS) DA targeted towards survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL).

METHODS

A prototype decision aid booklet was developed and subsequently reviewed by a steering group who provided feedback. Revisions were made to produce the DA tested in this study. HL survivors were recruited to an online survey and/or focus groups. Lymphoma practitioners were invited to an interview study. In the online survey, decisional conflict scales and knowledge scales were completed before and after accessing the DA. The focus groups and interviews explored acceptability and comprehensibility and the decisional needs of stakeholders. Focus groups and interviews were audio recorded. The framework method was used to analyse qualitative data.

RESULTS

38 HL survivors completed the online survey. Following exposure to the DA, knowledge of LCS and risk factors and decisional conflict scores (total score and subscale scores) improved significantly. 11 HL survivors took part in two focus groups (n = 5 and n = 6) and 11 practitioners were interviewed. Focus group and interview results: The language, format and length were considered acceptable. Both groups felt the DA was balanced and presented a choice. Icon arrays were felt to aid comprehension of absolute risk values and for some survivors, they reduced affective risk perceptions. Among survivors, the impact of radiation risk on decision making varied according to gender and screening interval, whilst practitioners did not anticipate it to be a major concern for patients. Both groups expressed that a screening offer could mitigate anxiety about lung cancer risk. As anticipated by practitioners, survivors expressed a desire to seek advice from their clinical team. Practitioners thought the DA would meet their informational needs regarding LCS  when supporting survivors.

CONCLUSIONS

The DA is considered acceptable by HL survivors and practitioners. The DA reduces decisional conflict and improves knowledge in HL survivors, suggesting that it would support HL survivors to make informed decisions when considering LCS in a future clinical trial.

Understanding patient factors to increase uptake of cancer screening: a review

Early detection of cancer through organized screening is a central component of population-level strategies to reduce cancer mortality. For screening programs to be effective, it is important that those invited to screening participate. However, uptake rates are suboptimal in many populations and vary between screening programs, indicating a complex combination of patient factors that require elucidation to develop evidence-based strategies to increase participation. In this review, the authors summarize individual-level (sociodemographic and psychosocial) factors associated with cancer screening uptake and evidence for the effectiveness of behavioral interventions to increase uptake. The authors reflect on current trends and future directions for behavioral cancer screening research to overcome challenges and address unmet needs in reducing cancer mortality.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Patient Decision Aids for Socially Disadvantaged Populations: Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS)

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs) and other shared decision-making (SDM) interventions for socially disadvantaged populations has not been well studied.

PURPOSE

To assess whether PtDAs and other SDM interventions improve outcomes or decrease health inequalities among socially disadvantaged populations and determine the critical features of successful interventions.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception to October 2019. Cochrane systematic reviews on PtDAs.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials of PtDAs and SDM interventions that included socially disadvantaged populations.

DATA EXTRACTION

Independent double data extraction using a standardized form and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-five PtDA and 13 other SDM intervention trials met our inclusion criteria. Compared with usual care, PtDAs improved knowledge (mean difference = 13.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 9.01, 18.82 [I2 = 96%]) and patient-clinician communication (relative risk = 1.62, 95% CI 1.42, 1.84 [I2 = 0%]). PtDAs reduced decisional conflict (mean difference = -9.59; 95% CI -18.94, -0.24 [I2 = 84%]) and the proportion undecided (relative risk = 0.39; 95% CI 0.28, 0.53 [I2 = 75%]). PtDAs did not affect anxiety (standardized mean difference = 0.02, 95% CI -0.22, 0.26 [I2 = 70%]). Only 1 trial looked at clinical outcomes (hemoglobin A1C). Five of the 12 PtDA studies that compared outcomes by disadvantaged standing found that outcomes improved more for socially disadvantaged participants. No evidence indicated which intervention characteristics were most effective. Results were similar for SDM intervention trials.

LIMITATIONS

Sixteen PtDA studies had an overall unclear risk of bias. Heterogeneity was high for most outcomes. Most studies only had short-term follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

PtDAs led to better outcomes among socially disadvantaged populations but did not reduce health inequalities. We could not determine which intervention features were most effective.[Box: see text].

An RCT of a decision aid to support informed choices about taking aspirin to prevent colorectal cancer and other chronic diseases: a study protocol for the SITA (Should I Take Aspirin?) trial

Background

Australian guidelines recommend that all people aged 50–70 years old actively consider taking daily low-dose aspirin (100–300 mg per day) for 2.5 to 5 years to reduce their risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Despite the change of national CRC prevention guidelines, there has been no active implementation of the guidelines into clinical practice.

We aim to test the efficacy of a health consultation and decision aid, using a novel expected frequency tree (EFT) to present the benefits and harms of low dose aspirin prior to a general practice consultation with patients aged 50–70 years, on informed decision-making and uptake of aspirin.

Methods

Approximately five to seven general practices in Victoria, Australia, will be recruited to participate. Patients 50–70 years old, attending an appointment with their general practitioner (GP) for any reason, will be invited to participate in the trial. Two hundred fifty-eight eligible participants will be randomly allocated 1:1 to intervention or active control arms using a computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by general practice, sex, and mode of trial delivery (face-to-face or teletrial).

There are two co-primary outcomes: informed decision-making at 1-month post randomisation, measured by the Multi-dimensional Measure of Informed Choice (MMIC), and self-reported daily use of aspirin at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include decisional conflict at 1-month and other behavioural changes to reduce CRC risk at both time points.

Discussion

This trial will test the efficacy of novel methods for implementing national guidelines to support informed decision-making about taking aspirin in 50–70-year-olds to reduce the risk of CRC and other chronic diseases.

Trial registration

The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12620001003965. Registered on 10 October 2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-021-05365-8.

Layperson Views about the Design and Evaluation of Decision Aids: A Public Deliberation

PURPOSE

We carried out the first public deliberation to elicit lay input regarding guidelines for the design and evaluation of decision aids, focusing on the example of colorectal ("colon") cancer screening.

METHODS

A random, demographically stratified sample of 28 laypeople convened for 4 days, during which they were informed about key issues regarding colon cancer, screening tests, risk communication, and decision aids. Participants then deliberated in small and large group sessions about the following: 1) What information should be included in all decision aids for colon screening? 2) What risk information should be in a decision aid and how should risk information be presented? 3) What makes a screening decision a good one (reasonable or legitimate)? 4) What makes a decision aid and the advice it provides trustworthy? With the help of a trained facilitator, the deliberants formulated recommendations, and a vote was held on each to identify support and alternative views.

RESULTS

Twenty-one recommendations ("deliberative conclusions") were strongly supported. Some conclusions matched current recommendations, such as that decision aids should be available for use with and without providers present (conclusions 1-4) and should support informed choice (conclusion 9). Some conclusions differed from current recommendations, at least in emphasis-for example, that decision aids should disclose cost of screening (conclusion 11) and should be kept simple and understandable (conclusion 14). Deliberants recommended that decision aids should disclose the baseline risk of getting colon cancer (conclusions 15, 17).

LIMITATIONS

Single location and medical decision.

CONCLUSIONS

Guidelines for design of decision aids should consider putting a greater focus on disclosing cost and keeping decision aids simple, and they possibly should recommend disclosing less extensive amounts of quantitative information than currently recommended.

Providing Balanced Information about Options in Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards

BACKGROUND

The objective of this International Patient Decision Aids Standard (IPDAS) review is to update and synthesize theoretical and empirical evidence on how balanced information can be presented and measured in patient decision aids (PtDAs).

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team conducted a scoping review using 2 search strategies in multiple electronic databases evaluating the ways investigators defined and measured the balance of information provided about options in PtDAs. The first strategy combined a search informed by the Cochrane Review of the Effectiveness of Decision Aids with a search on balanced information. The second strategy repeated the search published in the 2013 IPDAS update on balanced presentation.

RESULTS

Of 2450 unique citations reviewed, the full text of 168 articles was screened for eligibility. Sixty-four articles were included in the review, of which 13 provided definitions of balanced presentation, 8 evaluated mechanisms that may introduce bias, and 42 quantitatively measured balanced with methods consistent with the IPDAS criteria in PtDAs. The revised definition of balanced information is, "Objective, complete, salient, transparent, evidence-informed, and unbiased presentation of text and visual information about the condition and all relevant options (with important elements including the features, benefits, harms and procedures of those options) in a way that does not favor one option over another and enables individuals to focus attention on important elements and process this information."

CONCLUSIONS

Developers can increase the balance of information in PtDAs by informing their structure and design elements using the IPDAS checklist. We suggest that new PtDA components pertaining to balance be evaluated for cognitive bias with experimental methods as well by objectively evaluating patients' and content experts' beliefs from multiple perspectives.

A decision aid to facilitate informed choices among cataract patients: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of a patient decision aid on the quality of decision-making for patients with age-related cataracts.

METHODS

773 patients with cataracts aged 50-80 years were randomly assigned to receive either the intervention decision aid (including standard information, quantitative information on the possible outcomes of cataract surgery and a value clarification exercise) or the control booklet (including standard information). The primary outcome was informed choice (defined as adequate knowledge and congruency between attitudes and surgical intentions), which was assessed at 2 weeks after intervention via a telephone interview.

RESULTS

The decision aid increased the proportion of participants making an informed choice, from 5.68 % in the control group to 27.7 % in the intervention group (P < 0.001). Compared with controls, more participants in the intervention group had adequate overall knowledge about cataract surgery (36.8 % vs. 8.79 % in controls; P < 0.001), and fewer participants intended to undergo surgery (22.5 % vs. 34.1 % in controls; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Use of the patient decision aid may increase the proportion of patients making informed choices. Importantly, it might also reduce the acceptance of operations.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Patient decision aids represent a simple and low-cost tool to facilitate informed choice among patients with cataracts.

Personalising lung cancer screening: An overview of risk-stratification opportunities and challenges

Randomised clinical trials have shown the efficacy of computed tomography lung cancer screening, initiating discussions on whether and how to implement population‐based screening programs. Due to smoking behaviour being the primary risk‐factor for lung cancer and part of the criteria for determining screening eligibility, lung cancer screening is inherently risk‐based. In fact, the selection of high‐risk individuals has been shown to be essential in implementing lung cancer screening in a cost‐effective manner. Furthermore, studies have shown that further risk‐stratification may improve screening efficiency, allow personalisation of the screening interval and reduce health disparities. However, implementing risk‐based lung cancer screening programs also requires overcoming a number of challenges. There are indications that risk‐based approaches can negatively influence the trade‐off between individual benefits and harms if not applied thoughtfully. Large‐scale implementation of targeted, risk‐based screening programs has been limited thus far. Consequently, questions remain on how to efficiently identify and invite high‐risk individuals from the general population. Finally, while risk‐based approaches may increase screening program efficiency, efficiency should be balanced with the overall impact of the screening program. In this review, we will address the opportunities and challenges in applying risk‐stratification in different aspects of lung cancer screening programs, as well as the balance between screening program efficiency and impact.

Health Literacy Interventions in Cancer: a Systematic Review

Approximately one-third of adults in the United States (U.S.) have limited health literacy. Those with limited health literacy often have difficultly navigating the health care environment, including navigating care across the cancer continuum (e.g., prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment). Evidence-based interventions to assist adults with limited health literacy improve health outcomes; however, little is known about health literacy interventions in the context of cancer and their impact on cancer-specific health outcomes. The purpose of this review was to identify and characterize the literature on health literacy interventions across the cancer care continuum. Specifically, our aim was to review the strength of evidence, outcomes assessed, and intervention modalities within the existing literature reporting health literacy interventions in cancer. Our search yielded 1036 records (prevention/screening n = 174; diagnosis/treatment n = 862). Following deduplication and review for inclusion criteria, we analyzed 87 records of intervention studies reporting health literacy outcomes, including 45 pilot studies (prevention/screening n = 24; diagnosis/treatment n = 21) and 42 randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental trials (prevention/screening n = 31; diagnosis/treatment n = 11). This literature included 36 unique interventions (prevention/screening n = 28; diagnosis/treatment n = 8), mostly in the formative stages of intervention development, with few assessments of evidence-based interventions. These gaps in the literature necessitate further research in the development and implementation of evidence-based health literacy interventions to improve cancer outcomes.

Health Literacy and Shared Decision-making: Exploring the Relationship to Enable Meaningful Patient Engagement in Healthcare

Research into health literacy and shared decision-making has largely developed along parallel, but distinct lines over the past two decades. There is little evidence that the concepts and related practice have intersected except in the most functional way, for example, to simplify shared decision-making tools by improving readability scores of decision aids. This paper presents an integrated model to strengthen and sustain patient engagement in health care by drawing on the strengths of both concepts. This includes addressing patients' skills and capacities, alongside modifications to written and verbal information. We propose an expanded model of shared decision-making which incorporates health literacy concepts and promotes two-tiered intervention methods to improve the targeting and personalization of communication and support the development of transferable health literacy skills among patients.

Harms and Benefits of Cancer Screening

In recommending and offering screening, health services make a health claim ('it's good for you'). This article considers ethical aspects of establishing the case for cancer screening, building a service programme, monitoring its operation, improving its quality and integrating it with medical progress. The value of (first) screening is derived as a function of key parameters: prevalence of the target lesion in the detectable pre-clinical phase, the validity of the test and the respective net utilities or values attributed to four health states-true positives, false positives, false negatives and true negatives. Decision makers as diverse as public regulatory agencies, medical associations, health insurance funds or individual screenees can legitimately come up with different values even when presented with the same evidence base. The main intended benefit of screening is the reduction of cause-specific mortality. All-cause mortality is not measurably affected. Overdiagnosis and false-positive tests with their sequelae are the main harms. Harms and benefits accrue to distinct individuals. Hence the health claim is an invitation to a lottery with benefits for few and harms to many, a violation of the non-maleficence principle. While a public decision maker may still propose a justified screening programme, respect for individual rights and values requires preference-sensitive, autonomy-enhancing educational materials-even at the expense of programme effectiveness. Opt-in recommendations and more 'consumer-oriented' qualitative research are needed.

Discussions of Potential Mammography Benefits and Harms among Patients with Limited Health Literacy and Providers: "Oh, There are Harms?"

Starting breast cancer screening at age 40 versus 50 may increase potential harms frequency with a small mortality benefit. Younger women's screening decisions, therefore, may be complex. Shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended for women under 50 and may support women under 55 for whom guidelines vary. How women with limited health literacy (LHL) approach breast cancer screening decision-making is less understood, and most SDM tools are not designed with their input. This phenomenological study sought to characterize mammography counseling experiences among women with LHL and primary care providers (PCPs). Women ages 40-54 with LHL who had no history of breast cancer or mammogram within 9 months were approached before a primary care visit at a safety-net hospital. PCPs at this site were invited to participate. Qualitative interviews explored mammography counseling experiences. Patients also reviewed sample information materials. A constant comparison technique generated four themes salient to 25 patients and 20 PCPs: addressing family history versus comprehensive risk assessment; potential mammography harms discussions; information delivery preferences; and integrating pre-visit information tools. Findings suggest that current counseling techniques may not be responsive to patient-identified needs. Opportunities exist to improve how mammography information is shared and increase accessibility across the health literacy spectrum.

Effectiveness of a decision aid for colorectal cancer screening on components of informed choice according to educational attainment: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The decision to take up colorectal cancer screening has to be made on informed grounds balancing benefits and harms. Self-administered decision aids can support citizens in making an informed choice. A self-administered web-based decision aid targeting citizens with lower educational attainment has been evaluated within the target population. However, the effectiveness in the general screening population remains unexplored. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a web-based decision aid for colorectal cancer screening on components of informed choice among previous non-participants in colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

The study was designed as a parallel randomised controlled trial among non-participants in colorectal cancer screening in Central Denmark Region (men and women aged 53-74 years). Respondents to baseline and follow-up questionnaires comprised the study population (n = 1,723). The intervention group received the decision aid electronically along with the second reminder. The control group received only the second reminder. The main outcomes (knowledge, attitudes, uptake and decisional conflict) were obtained through questionnaires data and from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Screening Database. The decision aid increased the uptake rate by 8 percentage points (95% CI: 3.4;12.6) but had no effect on either knowledge (scale score differences: 0.09; 95% CI: -0.05;0.24) or attitudes (0.45; 95% CI: -0.00;0.91). Decisional conflict decreased by 1.69 scale points (95% CI: -3.18;-0.20). The effect was similar across educational attainment levels.

CONCLUSIONS

The web-based decision aid offers a feasible way to provide individualised screening information in a "one size fits all" approach that may hold the potential to increase informed CRC screening uptake.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT03253888.

The impact of hypothetical PErsonalised Risk Information on informed choice and intention to undergo Colorectal Cancer screening colonoscopy in Scotland (PERICCS)-a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There is currently no existing evidence on the effects of personalised risk information on uptake of colonoscopy following first line screening for colorectal cancer. This study aimed to measure the impact of providing risk information based on faecal haemoglobin concentration to allow a fully informed choice around whether or not to undergo colonoscopy.

METHODS

Two thousand seven hundred sixty-seven participants from the Scottish Bowel Screening Programme (SBoSP) database, who had not recently been invited for screening, were randomised to receive one of three types of hypothetical risk information materials: (1) numerical risk information (risk categories of one in 40, one in 1600 and one in 3500), (2) categorical risk information (highest, moderate and lowest risk), or (3) positive screening result letter (control group). The primary outcome was the impact of the risk materials on intention to undergo colonoscopy, to allow comparison with the current colonoscopy uptake of 77% for those with a positive screening result in the SBoSP. Secondary outcomes were knowledge, attitudes and emotional responses to the materials.

RESULTS

Four hundred thirty-four (15.7%) agreed to participate with 100 from the numerical risk group (69.0%), 104 from the categorical risk group (72.2%) and 104 from the control group (71.7%) returning completed materials. Intention to undergo colonoscopy was highest in the highest risk groups for the numerical and categorical study arms (96.8% and 95.3%, respectively), but even in the lowest risk groups was > 50% (58.1% and 60.7%, respectively). Adequate knowledge of colorectal screening and the risks and benefits of colonoscopy was found in ≥ 98% of participants in all three arms. All participants reported that they found the information easy-to-understand. 19.1%, 24.0% and 29.6% of those in the numerical, categorical and control group, respectively, reported that they found the information distressing (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Applying the risk categories to existing SBoSP data shows that if all participants were offered an informed choice to have colonoscopy, over two thirds of participants would intend to have the test. Equating to an increase in the number of screening colonoscopies from approx. 14,000 to 400,000 per annum, this would place an unmanageable demand on colonoscopy services, with a very small proportion of cancers and pre-cancers detected. However, the response to the materials were very positive, suggesting that providing risk information to those in lowest and moderate risk groups along with advice that colonoscopy is not currently recommended may be an option. Future research would be required to examine actual uptake.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Date applied 1 December 2017 ISRCTN number 14254582 .

Return-to-Player Percentage in Gaming Machines: Impact of Informative Materials on Player Understanding

The addictive potential of electronic gaming machines (EGMs) is currently explained within a cognitive-behavioural framework. This framework explains that various erroneous cognitions regarding players' likelihood of winning contribute to persistent EGM gambling behaviour. Related to these cognitions is the pervasive misunderstanding among players regarding the operation of EGMs. However, little research has focussed specifically on player understanding of the theoretical proportion returned to players over the lifetime of a machine; return to player percentage. This study aimed to investigate the extent to which players understand the concept return to player percentage presented in different educative formats. A sample of 112 university students were randomly allocated to one of four conditions pertaining to a different mode of information delivery; infographic, vignette, brochure, or mandated legislation (control). Participants completed post-intervention measures to determine changes in knowledge. As predicted, participants exhibited a lack of understanding of the concept of return to player at baseline. However, contrary to predictions, exposure to any of the experimental conditions did not result in a greater understanding of return to player than controls. The study findings emphasise the difficulty individuals have in understanding complex concepts related to return to player percentages when presented in current formats and content. Treatment and responsible gambling policies need to adopt strategies to effectively improve knowledge of this aspect of the structural characteristics of gaming machines.

Knowledge about benefits and risks of undergoing cataract surgery among cataract patients in Southern China

PURPOSE

To develop a theoretical framework for assessing knowledge about the possible outcomes of undergoing cataract surgery, and explore the association of knowledge level with psychological status and decision quality among patients with cataract in Southern China.

METHODS

The details of the knowledge scale were based on the health education information booklet provided by National Eye Institute, NIH. We used a theory-based approach to assess gist knowledge, which comprises 12 questions related to knowledge of the possible surgical outcomes. The scale was then used in a cross-sectional study to assess the association of knowledge score with psychological status and decision quality among cataract patients.

RESULTS

A total of 489 participants with age-related cataract were included in this study, and 10.2% (50/489) of them had adequate level of knowledge. The knowledge scale was significantly associated to the levels of worry (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.36, 95%CI: 0.18, 0.70; P = 0.003), anxiety (beta coefficient = - 5.36, 95%CI - 8.88, - 1.84; P = 0.003), inaction regret (OR = 0.49, 95%CI: 0.28, 0.88; P = 0.016) and decision conflict (beta coefficient = - 7.93, 95%CI - 12.81, - 3.04; P = 0.002) in multivariate analyses adjusted for age, sex, education level and literacy level.

CONCLUSION

Knowledge adequacy with cataract surgery outcomes was negatively associated with cataract worry, anxiety and decisional conflict. Patients with adequate knowledge were more likely to postpone cataract surgery.

20th Anniversary Update of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework: Part 2 Subanalysis of a Systematic Review of Patient Decision Aids

Background. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) has guided the development of patient decision aids (PtDAs) for 20 years and needs updating across a range of decisions and hypothesized outcomes. Purpose. To determine the effectiveness of ODSF-developed PtDAs on hypothesized outcomes and to recommend framework changes. Data Source. A subanalysis of randomized controlled trials included in the 2017 Cochrane review of PtDAs comparing PtDAs to usual care in adults considering health treatment or screening decisions (searched to 2015). Study Selection. Trials in the original review that evaluated ODSF-developed PtDAs. Data Synthesis. Meta-analyses of ODSF outcomes with similar measurements and descriptions of other reported outcomes. Results. Of 105 trials, 24 evaluated ODSF-developed PtDAs. Compared with usual care, ODSF PtDAs improved knowledge (mean difference [MD] 13.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 10.32−17.37; 14 trials), increased accurate risk perceptions (risk ratio [RR] 2.41; 95% CI 1.66−3.48; 7 trials), and increased congruence between informed values and chosen options (RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.09−1.59; 4 trials). They reduced perceived decisional needs as measured using the Decisional Conflict Scale (MD −5.92; 95% CI −8.58 to −3.26; 15 trials) and the proportion of undecided patients (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.50−0.83; 13 trials). Non-ODSF PtDAs, designed with or without a specific framework, also outperformed usual care. Few ODSF trials measured secondary outcomes. Limitations. The included trials had heterogeneity. Conclusion. ODSF PtDAs address decisional needs and improve decision quality; the best indicator of addressing perceived uncertainty is “proportion undecided.” Secondary ODSF outcomes should be reduced to adherence to one’s chosen option and use/costs of health services, which warrant further research.

Patient-centred and economic effectiveness of a decision aid for patients with age-related cataract in China: study protocol of a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The need for cataract surgery is on the rise due to our ageing population and high demands for greater visual functioning. Although the majority of patients want to participate in a shared decision-making process, no decision aid has been available to improve the quality of decision. The present study aims to determine whether a decision aid increases informed decision about cataract surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A parallel randomised controlled trial (772 participants) will be conducted. The decision aid will be implemented among patients with any age-related cataract in Yuexiu District, which is socioeconomically representative of a major metropolitan region in Southern China. Participants will be randomly assigned to receive either a patient decision aid or a traditional booklet, and they will complete three surveys: (1) baseline assessment before the intervention (time point (T)1), 2 weeks (T2) and 1 year (T3) after the intervention. The control group receives a traditional booklet with standard general information developed by the National Eye Institute to help patients understand cataract, whereas the intervention group receives a patient decision aid that includes not only the standard general information, but also the quantitative risk information on the possible outcomes of cataract surgery as well as value clarification exercise. The primary study outcome is the informed decision, the percentage of patients who have adequate knowledge and demonstrate consistency between attitudes and intentions. Secondary outcomes include perceived importance of cataract surgery benefits/harms, decision conflict and confidence, anticipated regret and booklet utilisation and acceptability at 2 weeks, and surgical rates and a cost-utility estimate of the decision aid at 1 year.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center (reference number: 2019KYPJ090). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings for academic audiences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03992807.

Subject positions in screening mammography and implications for informed choice

OBJECTIVE

Screening mammography has potential benefits as well as harms, but these are not always communicated to women. We therefore explored how women discuss screening mammography, the subject positions made available in their discourse, and the implications of these for informed choice. Design: We conducted 16 individual interviews with women aged 44-72 years who were attenders (n = 11) and non-attenders (n = 5) of screening, and analysed transcripts through Foucauldian Discourse Analysis. Main Outcome Measures: A semi-structured interview guide, informed by literature and researcher expertise, was used to collect data. Results: The women constructed screening mammography as either helpful or potentially harmful. We identified three subject positions-The Responsible Woman (who attends screening), The Irresponsible Woman (who does not attend screening), and the Judicious Woman (who engages in alternate breast health practices). Conclusion: These subject positions have the potential to limit women's choices, constrain shared decision-making with health professionals, and restrict women's engagement in risk-reducing behaviours. An expanded range of options ultimately offers an alternate future in which women's autonomy to control their own bodies is better supported.

Quality of decision aids developed for women at average risk of breast cancer eligible for mammographic screening: Systematic review and assessment according to the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument

Mammographic screening contributes to a reduction in specific mortality, but it has disadvantages. Decision aids are tools designed to support people's decisions. Because these aids influence patient choice, their quality is crucial. The objective of the current study was to conduct a systematic review of decision aids developed for women eligible for mammographic screening who have an average breast cancer risk and to assess the quality of these aids. The systematic review included articles published between January 1, 1997, and August 1, 2019, in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and PsycInfo databases. The studies were reviewed independently by 2 reviewers. Any study containing a decision aid for women eligible for mammographic screening with an average breast cancer risk was included. Two double-blind reviewers assessed the quality of the selected decision aids using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument, version 3 (IPDASi). Twenty-three decision aids were extracted. Classification of decision aid quality using the IPDASi demonstrated large variations among the decision aids (maximum IPDASi score, 188; mean ± SD score, 132.6 ± 23.8; range, 85-172). Three decision aids had high overall scores. The 3 best-rated dimensions were disclosure (maximum score, 8; mean score, 6.8), focusing on transparency; information (maximum score, 32; mean score, 26.1), focusing on the provision of sufficient details; and probabilities (maximum score, 32; mean score 25), focusing on the presentation of probabilities. The 3 lowest-rated dimensions were decision support technology evaluation (maximum score, 8; mean score, 4.3), focusing on the effectiveness of the decision aid; development (maximum score, 24; mean score, 12.6), evaluating the development process; and plain language (maximum score, 4; mean score, 1.9), assessing appropriateness for patients with low literacy. The results of this review identified 3 high-quality decision aids for breast cancer screening.

Association between prenatal maternal infection and disordered eating behaviours in adolescence: a UK population-based prospective birth cohort study

BACKGROUND

Prenatal infections have been proposed as a putative risk factor for a number of psychiatric outcomes across a continuum of severity. Evidence on eating disorders is scarce. We investigated whether exposure to prenatal maternal infections is associated with an increased risk of disordered eating and weight and shape concerns in adolescence in a large UK birth cohort.

METHODS

We used data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. The primary exposure was maternal experience of infections at any time in pregnancy. Study outcomes were presence of any, monthly or weekly disordered eating at 14 and 16 years of age, and weight and shape concerns at 14 years. We defined the causal effect of the exposure on these outcomes using a counterfactual framework adjusting our analyses for a number of hypothesised confounders, and imputing missing confounder data using multiple imputation.

RESULTS

In total, 4884 children had complete exposure and outcome data at age 14 years, and 4124 at 16 years. Exposed children had a greater risk of reporting weekly disordered eating at both age 14 [risk difference (RD) 0.9%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.01 to 1.9, p = 0.08] and 16 (RD 2.3%, 95% CI 0.6-3.9, p < 0.01), though evidence of an association was weak at age 14 years. Exposed children also had greater weight and shape concerns at age 14 years (mean difference 0.15, 95% CI 0.05-0.26, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to prenatal maternal infection is associated with greater risk of disordered eating in adolescence. This association could be explained by in utero processes leading to impaired neurodevelopment or altered immunological profiles. Residual confounding cannot be excluded.

Decisional needs assessment of patients with complex care needs in primary care

RATIONALE

Patients with complex care needs who frequently use health services often face challenges in managing their health and with integrated care, leading to frequent decision making. These complex care needs require a good understanding of health issues and their impact on daily life. As the decisional needs of this particular clientele have yet to be described in scientific literature, they warrant further study.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the decision-making needs of patients with complex care needs (PCCN) who frequently use health care services.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter cross-sectional qualitative descriptive study in four institutions of the health and social services network of Quebec (Canada). We enrolled a convenience sample of PCCNs who frequently use health care services, health care providers, case managers, and decision-makers. We conducted interviews and focus groups and investigated decisional needs according to the Ottawa decision support framework: roles played and desired in the decision-making process, facilitators, and barriers. We conducted qualitative data collection and qualitative deductive/inductive thematic analysis within and across participating groups.

RESULTS

In total, 16 patients, 38 clinicians, six case managers, and 14 decision-makers participated in the study. The decisional needs of this clientele are numerous, varied and different from those of the general population. We identified 26 decisional needs grouped under five themes. The most frequent decisions related to visiting the emergency department, moving to a nursing home, and adhering to a plan or treatment. In addition, we identified new themes such as patients' fear and mistrust of health professionals, differences of opinion between health professionals and health professionals' preconceived opinions of patients.

CONCLUSION

We observed a wide range of types of decisions that patients face and differences in decision-making needs across participating groups. Our results should inform future research on the development of a patient decision aid tool.

[Informed choice in breast cancer screening: the role of education]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of receiving information about the benefits and harms of breast cancer screening in informed choice, according to educational level.

METHOD

Secondary analysis of a randomized, controlled study, in four screening programs, in Catalonia and the Canary Islands (Spain). We analyzed 400 women who were going to be invited to participate for the first time. The intervention group received a decision aid that showed the benefits and harms of screening. The control group received a standard brochure that recommended participating in the screening program. Educational level was grouped into two categories, low and high. The primary outcome was informed choice defined as adequate knowledge and consistency between attitudes and intentions.

RESULTS

The intervention produced a greater increase in knowledge in women with a high educational level compared to those with a lower educational level. Among women who received the intervention, informed choice was almost three times higher in those with a high educational level (27% versus 11%). No differences were observed between educational levels in decisional conflict, confidence in the decision, anxiety and worry about breast cancer, in the intervention and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A decision aid for breast cancer screening had much more impact on informed choice among women with a high educational level. In women with low educational level, the attitude towards screening improved and there was an increase in the intention to be screened.

Development and preliminary evaluation of a decision aid to support informed choice among patients with age-related cataract

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision making and meaningful patient involvement are key in improving cataract treatment outcomes, but no decision aid has been formally developed and validated for this purpose. Our aims were to develop a patient decision aid to guide patients' decision about when to undergo cataract surgery, and to determine patient's comprehension and booklet's acceptability.

METHODS

The patient decision aid was developed and included evidence-based information about general cataract, its benefits, risks of treatment options, and value clarification exercise. A total of 30 patients with age-related cataract aged between 50 and 80 years were interviewed after using either the patient decision aid (n = 15) or the traditional education booklet (n = 15).

RESULTS

The patients who received the decision aid agreed that the information was new (n = 15, 100%), the length of the aid was "just about right" (n = 13, 87%), the information was clear and easy to understand (n = 13, 87%), the decision aid was helpful in making decision (n = 13, 87%) and would like to recommend this decision aid to others (n = 14, 93%).

CONCLUSIONS

The decision aid was assessed positively by patients with age-related cataract. There is a need for its further verification in the context of primary eye care setting.

The LEAD trial-The effectiveness of a decision aid on decision making among citizens with lower educational attainment who have not participated in FIT-based colorectal cancer screening in Denmark: A randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

This trial tested the effectiveness of a self-administered web-based decision aid, targeted at citizens with lower educational attainment, on informed choice about colorectal cancer screening participation as assessed by group levels of knowledge, attitudes and uptake.

METHODS

The randomised controlled trial was conducted among 2702 screening-naïve Danish citizens, 53-74 years old, with lower educational attainment. Baseline questionnaire respondents (62%) were allocated to intervention and control groups. Intervention group citizens received the decision aid. Outcomes were informed choice, worries and decisional conflict.

RESULTS

Analyses were conducted among 339 eligible citizens. The mean difference in knowledge score change between intervention and control group was 0.00 (95% confidence interval (CI): -0.38;0.38). Trends towards more positive screening attitudes (mean difference in score change: 0.72, 95% CI: -0.38;1.81) and higher screening uptake (7.6%, 95% CI:-2.2;17.4%) were observed. Worries (-0.33, 95% CI: -0.97;0.32) and decisional conflict (mean difference: -3.5, 95%CI: -7.0;-0.1) were slightly reduced.

CONCLUSIONS

The decision aid did not affect informed choice or knowledge. However, there were trends towards increased screening uptake and more positive screening attitudes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Being a simple intervention and easily administered, the decision aid could represent a cost-effective way of enhancing screening uptake, and some elements of informed decision-making.

Beyond Oncology: Question Prompt Lists in Healthcare-A Scoping Review Protocol

Question prompt lists (QPL) are an instrument to promote patient participation in medical encounters by providing a set of questions patients can use during consultations. QPL have predominantly been examined in oncology. Less is known about their use in other contexts. Therefore, we plan to conduct a scoping review to provide an overview of the fields of healthcare in which QPL have been developed and evaluated. MEDLINE/PUBMED, PSYCINFO, PSYNDEX, WEB OF SCIENCE, and CINAHL will be systematically searched. Primary studies from different healthcare contexts that address the following participants/target groups will be included: persons with an acute, chronic, or recurring health condition other than cancer; healthy persons in non-oncological primary preventive measures. There will be no restrictions in terms of study design, sample size, or outcomes. However, only published studies will be included. Studies that were published in English and German between 1990 and 2019 will be examined. Two independent reviewers will apply defined inclusion/exclusion criteria and determine study eligibility in the review process guided by the PRISMA statement.

Evaluating two decision aids for Australian men supporting informed decisions about prostate cancer screening: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Australian clinicians are advised to 'offer evidence-based decisional support to men considering whether or not to have a PSA test'. This randomised trial compared the performance and acceptability of two new decision aids (DAs) to aid men in making informed choices about PSA screening.

METHODS

~3000 Australian men 45-60 years with varying educational attainment were recruited via an online panel and randomised to view one of two online decision aids (one full length, one abbreviated) and completed a questionnaire. The primary outcome was informed choice about PSA screening.

FINDINGS

Significantly more men in the long DA group (38%) made an informed choice than men who received the shorter DA (33%) (95% CI 1.1% to 8.2%; p = 0.008). On knowledge, the long DA group scored, on average, 0.45 points higher than the short DA group (95% CI 0.14 to 0.76; p = 0.004) and 5% more of the participants achieved an adequate knowledge score (95% CI 1.9% to 8.8%; p = 0.002). Men allocated the long DA were less likely to intend to have a PSA test in the future (53%) than men in the short DA group (59%). Both DAs rated highly on acceptability.

CONCLUSIONS

Both DAs were useful and acceptable to men regardless of education level and both supported informed decision making. The long version resulted in higher knowledge, and a higher proportion of men able to make an informed choice, but the differences were small. Long DAs may be useful for men whose informational needs are not satisfied by a short DA.

What Is the Effectiveness of Patient Decision Aids for Cancer-Related Decisions? A Systematic Review Subanalysis

PURPOSE

To determine the effectiveness of patient decision aids when used with patients who face cancer-related decisions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two reviewers independently screened the 105 trials in the original 2017 Cochrane review to identify eligible trials of patient decision aids across the cancer continuum. Primary outcomes were attributes of the choice and decision-making process. Secondary outcomes were patient behavior and health system effects. A meta-analysis was conducted for similar outcome measures.

RESULTS

Forty-six trials evaluated patient decision aids for cancer care, including 27 on screening decisions (59%), 12 on treatments (26%), four on genetic testing (9%), and three on prevention (6%). Common decisions were aboutprostate cancer screening (30%), colorectal cancer screening (22%), breast cancer treatment (13%), and prostate cancer treatment (9%). Compared with the control groups (usual care or alternative interventions), the patient decision aid group improved the match between the chosen option and the features that mattered most to the patient as demonstrated by improved knowledge (weighted mean difference, 12.88 of 100; 95% CI, 9.87 to 15.89; 24 trials), accurate risk perception (risk ratio [RR], 1.77; 95% CI, 1.22 to 2.56; six trials), and value-choice agreement (RR, 2.76; 95% CI, 1.57 to 4.84; nine trials). Compared with controls, the patient decision aid group improved the decision-making process with decreased decisional conflict (weighted mean difference, -9.56 of 100; 95% CI, -13.90 to -5.23; 12 trials), reduced clinician-controlled decision making (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.79; eight trials), and fewer patients being indecisive (RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.78; nine trials).

CONCLUSION

Patient decision aids improve the attributes of the choice made and decision-making process for patients who face cancer-related decisions.

Development and pilot-testing of a colorectal cancer screening decision aid for individuals with varying health literacy levels

OBJECTIVE

Making an informed decision about colorectal cancer screening requires health literacy. Our aim was to develop and pilot-test a computer-based decision aid to support informed decision making about whether or not to participate in colorectal cancer screening for individuals with varying health literacy levels in the Netherlands.

METHODS

First, we designed and adapted the decision aid prototype among 25 individuals with low (n = 15) and adequate (n = 10) health literacy. Second, we used a before/after study to assess changes in knowledge, attitude, intention, decisional conflict, deliberation, anxiety and risk perception in an online survey among 81 individuals eligible for colorectal cancer screening with low (n = 35) and adequate (n = 46) health literacy.

RESULTS

The decision aid was acceptable, comprehensible, reduced decisional conflict, increased deliberation and improved knowledge about colorectal cancer screening, but not about colorectal cancer, among individuals with adequate and low health literacy. Usability was slightly higher for participants with adequate health literacy compared to those with low health literacy.

CONCLUSION

The decision aid is promising in supporting informed decision making about colorectal cancer screening, also among individuals with lower health literacy.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Further refinement of interactive features, such as videos, animations and the values clarification exercise, is needed to increase the usability of the decision aid.

Association of Preferences for Papillary Thyroid Cancer Treatment With Disease Terminology: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Importance

Given recent evidence of overdiagnosis and overtreatment of small papillary thyroid cancers (PTCs) and other low-risk cancers, strategies are needed to help patients consider less invasive treatment options.

Objectives

To determine which factors influence treatment preferences for patients with PTC, and the trade-offs in treatment factors people are willing to accept, and to understand how terminology influences preferences and benefit-harm trade-offs.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Preferences in PTC treatment were evaluated using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) conducted as a web-based survey using an existing public online research panel. Participants were randomized to receive 1 of 2 frames of information based on the terminology used to describe the condition: "cancer" or "lesion." Participants chose between 3 treatment options for PTC (thyroidectomy, hemithyroidectomy, and active surveillance). Analyses were conducted using a mixed logit model.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome variable was treatment preference; attributes of treatment options and sociodemographic characteristics were explanatory variables.

Results

The DCE was completed by 2054 participants (993 [48.3%] men and 1061 [51.7%] women; mean [SD] age, 46.0 [16.5] years) with no history of thyroid cancer. Participants preferred options with less frequent follow-up, lower out-of-pocket costs, lower chances of having voice and calcium level problems, and a lower risk of developing invasive thyroid cancer and of dying of thyroid cancer. When trading benefits against harms, participants were willing to accept a higher number of extra patients experiencing adverse effects to avoid a thyroid cancer death when the condition was described as a cancer compared with a lesion. Specifically, participants for whom the condition was described as a cancer were willing to accept more patients requiring lifelong medication (mean, 273; 95% CI, 207-339 vs mean, 98; 95% CI, 66-131), experiencing calcium problems (mean, 110; 95% CI, 77-144 vs mean, 56; 95% CI, 55-58), and fatigue (mean, 958; 95% CI, 691-1224 vs mean, 469; 95% CI, 375-564). For both the cancer and lesion terminology, health literacy consistently was associated with preferences for treatment options. Those with lower health literacy had a significantly lower preference for less invasive treatment options.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study makes an important contribution to understanding how attributes of treatment options, terminology, and patient characteristics, in particular health literacy, influence treatment decision making for PTC. As a result of increasing evidence of the indolent nature of PTC and other low-risk cancers, strategies to deal with potential overtreatment are critically needed.

Trial Registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12617000066381.